Education I need help with homework

Benchmark

Requires Lopeswrite

Assessment Description

Unit plans and lesson plans go hand in hand. A unit plan is the overall big picture that must be accomplished, while the lesson plans are the smaller pieces of the puzzle that come together to meet the standards of the unit. As a teacher, you will be expected to take a unit plan and break it into several lessons that are well aligned to the unit and meet the individual pieces of the overall learning outcomes.

Part 1: Lesson Plan

Review the unit plan that you created in Topics 2-4. Choose one day from the “ELM-570 Science Unit Plan” to design a cohesive lesson plan for that day. Use the "COE Lesson Plan Template” to create the lesson and include the following in your lesson plan:

· At least one standards-based science and one health learning objective

· Technological tools that promote digital literacy, engage students in inquiry-based learning, and support diverse learning needs

· At least one engagement learning experience that is cross-disciplinary and allows students opportunities for real-world application of science

Note:  Ensure any instructor feedback about your unit plan is adequately reflected in the full lesson plan.

Part 2: Reflection

Write a 350-500 word reflection on the design of your lesson plan. Include the following in your reflection:

· Describe how the lesson plan supports the three-dimensional learning model, including a discussion of the scientific and engineering practices, the crosscutting concepts, and the disciplinary core ideas.

· Explain how the technological tools used in the lesson promote digital literacy and engage students in inquiry.

· Discuss how the instructional strategies used in the lesson engage students and support diverse learning needs through the incorporation of learning theories, evidence-based best practices, and technology.

Support your assignment with a minimum of three scholarly resources.

Submit your lesson plan, reflection, and resources in a single document.

Note:  This assignment may be added as an artifact to the teacher toolkit you created in ELM-555.

While APA Style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite Technical Support Articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies and professional standards:

MEd Elementary Education (ITL/NITL)

2.2: Apply knowledge of content area standards and learning progressions to develop cross-disciplinary and real-world learning experiences. [InTASC 4(d), 4(e), 4(g), 4(k), 4(n), 4(o), 5(a), 5(b), 5(e), 5(i), 5(j), 5(q), 5(r), 5(s); TPE 3.1, 3.3; MC2, MC5]

2.5: Develop digital literacy by using technology to support learning and as tools of inquiry to engage students. [InTASC 4(c), 4(g), 5(c), 5(i), 5(l), 5(m); ISTE-E 3b; TPE 3.6, 3.7, 3.8; MC2]

3.5: Identify learning theories and evidence-based instructional strategies, resources, and technology to effectively engage learners and meet diverse learning needs. [InTASC 7(b), 7(k), 7(n), 8(a), 8(g), 8(k), 8(l), 8(n), 8(o), 8(r); TPE 4.4; 4.8; AAQEP 1b; MC2, MC5]

Rubric Criteria

Section 1: Classroom and Student Factors/Grouping

15 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

15 points

Classroom and student factors and their effect on planning, teaching, and assessing students are meaningful for the development of the lesson and skillfully described.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Classroom and student factors and their effect on planning, teaching, and assessing students are relevant to the development of the lesson and are clearly described.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 1: Standards and Learning Targets/Objectives

30 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

30 points

The science and health learning objectives are performance-driven, measurable, developmentally appropriate, and directly aligned with the state standards.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

The science and health learning objectives are skill-based, measurable, developmentally appropriate, and effectively aligned with the state standards.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 1: Academic Language and Resources/Materials

15 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

15 points

Academic language is listed along with innovative and engaging strategies for teaching the new terms. Resources, materials, equipment, and technology are innovative and enhance the lesson.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Academic language is listed along with clear and relevant strategies for teaching the new terms. Resources, materials, equipment, and technology are appropriate for the lesson.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 2: Anticipatory Set

15 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

15 points

Anticipatory set is designed to creatively engage students and meaningfully activate prior knowledge.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Anticipatory set is clearly designed to engage students and activate prior knowledge.

3. Approaching

11.1 points

Anticipatory set marginally engages students and activates prior knowledge.

 No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 2: Multiple Means of Representation

30 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

30 points

The means of representation creatively present content using a variety of developmentally appropriate methods or tools. Thoughtfully addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined in the lesson plan.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

The means of representation appropriately present content using more than one method or tool to meet the needs of diverse learners outlined in the lesson plan.

3. Approaching

22.2 points

The means of representation are unfocused or overly broad in presenting content. Methods for addressing the needs of the diverse learners outlined in the plan are underdeveloped.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 2: Multiple Means of Engagement (B)

30 points

Criteria Description

(C2.2)

5. Target

30 points

The means of engagement innovatively allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. The cross-disciplinary learning experience skillfully provides students with opportunities for real-world application of science. Meaningfully addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined in the lesson plan.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

The means of engagement effectively allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. The cross-disciplinary learning experience competently provides students with opportunities for real-world application of science. Appropriately addresses the needs of diverse learners outlined in the lesson plan.

3. Approaching

22.2 points

The means of engagement vaguely allow students to explore, practice, and apply the content and academic language. The cross-disciplinary learning experience minimally provides students with opportunities for real-world application of science. Does not fully address the needs of diverse learners outlined in the lesson plan.

 No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 2: Multiple Means of Expression

30 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

30 points

Planned formative and summative assessments are well-aligned with the stated learning objectives and standards, and they effectively and creatively identify multiple means for response, selection, and composition to accommodate all learners. Well-crafted formative assessments are designed to provide data on student performance for monitoring and adjusting instruction and provide students feedback so they can evaluate and adjust their own learning. Summative assessment is comprehensive and cohesive in form and function.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

Planned formative and summative assessments are generally aligned with the stated learning objectives and standards, and they clearly identify multiple means for response, selection, and composition to accommodate all learners. Relevant formative assessments are designed to provide data on student performance for monitoring and adjusting instruction and provide students feedback so they can evaluate and adjust their own learning. Summative assessment is cohesive in form and function.

3. Approaching

22.2 points

Planned formative and summative assessments are vaguely aligned with the stated learning objectives and standards. Attempt to identify multiple means for response, selection, and composition to accommodate all learners is lacking depth. Formative assessments are somewhat designed to provide data on student performance for monitoring and adjusting instruction. Opportunities for providing feedback to students so they can evaluate and adjust their own learning are minimal. Summative assessment lacks relevance or clarity in form and function.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Section 2: Extension Activity and/or Homework

15 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

15 points

Extension activities and/or homework are creative, developmentally appropriate, and clearly relate to the developed lesson.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Extension activities and/or homework are clear and mostly relate to the developed lesson.

3. Approaching

11.1 points

Extension activities and/or homework are unfocused, lacking realism, or not clearly related to the developed lesson.

 No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Reflection: 3-Dimensional Learning

15 points

Criteria Description

5. Target

15 points

Description of how the lesson plan supports the three dimensions of science learning is advanced and comprehensive.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Description of how the lesson plan supports the three dimensions of science learning is accurate and complete.

3. Approaching

11.1 points

Description of how the lesson plan supports the three dimensions of science learning is vague and missing key details.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Reflection: Digital Literacy (B)

30 points

Criteria Description

(C2.5)

5. Target

30 points

Explanation of how the technological tools used in the lesson promote digital literacy is insightful and creatively engages students in inquiry.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

Explanation of how the technological tools used in the lesson promote digital literacy is noteworthy and effectively engages students in inquiry.

 No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Reflection: Instructional Strategies (B)

30 points

Criteria Description

(C3.5)

5. Target

30 points

Proficiently discusses how the instructional strategies used in the lesson engage students and support diverse learning needs through the incorporation of learning theories, evidence-based best practices, and technology.

4. Acceptable

26.1 points

Successfully discusses how the instructional strategies used in the lesson engage students and support diverse learning needs through the incorporation of learning theories, evidence-based best practices, and technology.

No Submission

0 points

Not addressed.

Supporting Research and Documentation of Sources

15 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate designated style and formatting to document sources in citations and references.

5. Target

15 points

Supporting research is compelling and thorough. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Acceptable

13.05 points

Supporting research is credible and relevant. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching

11.1 points

Supporting research is minimal and somewhat inaccurate. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several minor formatting errors are present.