Hawaii DOE student learning objectives



STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE

TEACHER TEMPLATE

|Teacher Name: Keiko Yamamoto |School: Aloha High School |Complex: Pearl City |

|Grade: 9-12 |Content Area: World Languages |Course Name: Japanese Level 2 |Period: 3 |

|Student Population: |

|Total Number of Students __28__ Males __14__ Females__14_ SPED Inclusion __1__ SPED Pullout __0___ ELL __1__ |

|GT __2__ Any Other _____________ _____ _____________ _____ ______________ _____ |

|Additional Information: |

|SLO Components |For a complete description of SLO components and guiding questions, use the “Student Learning Objective Planning Document” attachment.|

|Learning Goal |Learning Goal: |

| |Students will be able to perform a spontaneous conversation to provide directions in the target language accurately with appropriate |

| |fluency, speed, pronunciation, and level of politeness. The directions must include a reference to at least one landmark and |

| |appropriate use of direction and location vocabulary and sentence patterns. Students will be provided 10 minutes to acclimate |

| |themselves with the map in the target language before conducting the spontaneous conversation. |

| | |

| |Big idea: |

| |Language is a complex system that requires the learner to take risks toward the development of interpersonal, interpretative and |

| |presentational modes of communication. |

| | |

| |Standards/Benchmarks: |

| | |

| |Standard 1: INTERPERSONAL: Use target language to engage in conversations, provide and obtain information, express feelings and |

| |emotions, and exchange opinions |

| | |

| |Benchmark WL.IS.Y2.1.2: Provide details to elaborate on familiar topics and ask clarifying questions |

| | |

| |Standard 2: INTERPRETIVE: Understand and interpret written and spoken language on diverse topics from diverse media |

| | |

| |Benchmark WL.IS.Y2.2.1: Identify the main idea and significant details of oral or written material with limited visual cues |

| | |

| |Rationale: |

| | |

| |At a recent Hawaii World Language Summit, business, government and university leaders expressed concern that our education system is |

| |not producing students who will be able to fulfill the language needs of our state in the next 5-10 years. Summit coordinators |

| |demonstrated the negative impact Hawaii may suffer if the DOE fails to improve World Language programs. Therefore, in order to be |

| |College and Career Ready in the 21st century, Hawaii’s students need to be able to communicate proficiently in a second language. |

| |However, on a standards based pre-assessment, 100% of students performed at a Novice or below level in their ability to give accurate |

| |directions in the target language. Therefore, this is an appropriate focus for students to learn. |

| | |

| |The learning goal requires students to analyze a map in the target language and construct accurate directions utilizing appropriate |

| |vocabulary, sentence structures, and levels of politeness in the given situation. (DOK 3) |

| | |

| |Interval of instruction necessary to address goal: _ _ yearlong _X_ semester |

|Assessments, Scoring and |Planned assessments and criteria used to determine levels of performance: |

|Criteria | |

| |A variety of common performance tasks will be used to measure student success throughout the semester. All tasks have been validated |

| |through the Quality Assessment tool and will use the rubric provided below (adapted from the Hawaii Content and Performance Standards |

| |III Database.) These tasks are aligned to the World Language state standards. Listed below are some examples of the performance |

| |assessment tasks. |

| | |

| |To assess the ability to accurately create directions to a location in the target language which includes a reference to at least one |

| |landmark and appropriate use of direction and location vocabulary and sentence patterns: |

| | |

| |Formative Assessment – Skit Presentation |

| |Students will present a live skit with a partner where the following information is provided by the teacher: |

| |Destination; and |

| |Map of city. |

| |Students viewing the skit will provide evidence that they accurately interpreted the information shared through a feedback form. |

| | |

| |Formative Assessment – Navigation of Toy Cars |

| |Students given enlarged simplified map of a city and miniature cars. Students must play the part of a taxi driver (interprets |

| |directions) and customer giving directions to a destination. A third student will critique the fluency of the conversation based on |

| |the given rubric and provide feedback on their performance. |

| | |

| |Formative Assessment – I-pod Recordings for Detailed Formative Feedback |

| |Students are randomly paired and given a map in the target language, role cards with parameters of a dialogue, and a time limit to |

| |record the conversation. Teacher provides an “i-pod” or other recording device, and allows the students to go to stations around the |

| |room. Each student must play the role of giver and receiver of directions. The receiver must provide a written interpretation of the|

| |directions provided by tracing it on a map and providing additional written details. |

| | |

| |Formative Assessment – Voice Thread Recordings |

| |Given a map labeled in the target language, students will create accurate, detailed directions to a location designated on a map. |

| |Student must be able to complete the state the directions with appropriate fluency, speed, and pronunciation to be understood by a |

| |native speaker of the target language. This assessment is recorded in VoiceThread. Classmates will respond by providing an |

| |interpretation of the directions given by guessing their assigned destination and scoring the student submission. |

| | |

| |Summative Assessment – Taxi Cab Directions |

| |Student will role play the part of a taxi customer while the teacher will play the part of the taxi driver. Student will be assessed |

| |on their ability to accurately provide directions to a location on the map. |

| | |

| |The use of a 4-point rubric will be used to score student responses. This rubric was modified from the Hawaii Content and Performance|

| |Standards III Database. |

| | |

| |Advanced |

| |Proficient |

| |Partially Proficient |

| |Novice |

| | |

| |Provide details to elaborate on a variety of topics and ask clarifying questions, using sentences or strings of sentences and expanded|

| |vocabulary at the appropriate level of politeness for the situation. Able to speak fluently with near-native speed, accuracy, and |

| |pronunciation. |

| |Provide details to elaborate on familiar topics and ask clarifying questions, using sentences or phrases and expanded vocabulary at |

| |the appropriate level of politeness for the situation. Able to speak fluently with appropriate speed, accuracy, and pronunciation. |

| |Provide details to elaborate on very familiar topics and ask clarifying questions, using simple phrases, familiar vocabulary, and/or |

| |some memorized words and phrases with inconsistent use of the appropriate level of politeness. Able to speak with some fluency with |

| |an inconsistent degree of appropriate speed, accuracy, and pronunciation. |

| |Provide details to elaborate on limited topics or ask clarifying questions, using memorized words and phrases. Inconsistent or |

| |failure to use the appropriate level of politeness. Not able to speak fluently to the degree that it is difficult for a native |

| |speaker to comprehend. |

| | |

| |Advanced |

| |Proficient |

| |Partially Proficient |

| |Novice |

| | |

| |Identify the main idea and significant details of longer and more complex oral or written material with limited visual cues  |

| |Identify the main idea and significant details of familiar oral or written material with limited visual cues  |

| |Identify some of the main idea and significant details of highly predictable and familiar oral or written material with limited visual|

| |cues  |

| |Identify very little of the main idea or significant details of highly predictable and familiar oral or written material with limited |

| |visual cues  |

| | |

| | |

| |Evidence will all be scored on the common rubric and stored in digital student evidence binders. Scoring will be done with grade |

| |level colleagues to ensure reliability. If there are no colleagues with the language expertise necessary at the school, other high |

| |school teachers from the complex area or community members may be tapped to assist with the evaluation. |

| | |

| |In addition to these formal assessments, informal assessments such as exit passes and cooperative learning activities (e.g., Numbered |

| |Heads, Round Table, etc.) will be done daily to determine student progress in mastering necessary content and skills, and to determine|

| |the need for differentiation. Students identified as needing additional support will be asked to attend small group tutoring sessions|

| |before and/or after school, and/or during lunch. These students will also be paired with a in-class support peer to provide easily |

| |accessible support toward success. |

|Expected Targets |Starting point for student performance groups: |

| |Teacher examined eCSSS reports on SPED/ELL students and final exam responses on related sentence structures and vocabulary from the |

| |previous year to determine possible student performance groups. |

| | |

| |To further define the starting point, a pre-assessment was given where students were required to provide directions from the school |

| |exit to a nearby landmark. Students were assessed on the clarity and accuracy of their directions, and details provided. Student |

| |responses were self-assessed and teacher assessed. |

| | |

| |95% of the students entering Japanese Level 2 scored at or below the Novice and 5% scored at the Partially Proficient Level in their |

| |ability to accurately create and interpret directions in the target language to various locations on a map. |

| | |

| |Expected target for each student performance group: |

| |By the end of the year, 100% of the 28 students will demonstrate a minimum of one level increase in their language proficiency based |

| |on the rubric provided. Of these 28 students, 85% will demonstrate a level of proficiency or advanced on the assessment based on the |

| |rubric. |

| | |

| |Rationale for expected targets: |

| |Students are required to analyze information provided in a map and synthesize this information with their knowledge of vocabulary, |

| |sentence structure and cultural nuances of language to create an appropriate spontaneous, fluent conversation. Through structured |

| |lessons that scaffold the learning and practice for students, it is expected that all students will show a minimum of one year’s |

| |growth during the course of the year. Appropriate accommodations and supports will be provided for students with special needs to |

| |ensure they achieve maximum level of growth. Through data and the initial assessment, it was determined that there are 4 students (1 |

| |SPED, 2 ELL, and 1 who signed a waiver to advance to Level 2 (i.e., was asked to repeat Level 1 due to a final grade of “D”)) who will|

| |require additional supports or assistance. |

|Instructional Strategies |Instructional strategies for each level of performance: |

| |Direct Instruction of related vocabulary and language structures. Instruction to include modeling, guided practice, and scaffolding |

| |of knowledge and skills necessary for success in the performance based assessment. |

| |Total Physical Response to practice directions. |

| |Peer or group practice during class sessions and Independent Practice through homework toward mastery. Instruction will spiral to |

| |scaffold and reinforce skills and understanding toward automaticity and accuracy in language production. |

| |Listening Comprehension activities to build their ability to comprehend language at native speed and provide a model for target level |

| |of fluency. |

| |Activities that use the target language in authentic or near authentic communication situations (e.g. “Treasure Hunt” Activity where |

| |students must comprehend clues to find a treasure around the school.) |

| |Mini research paper on the elements of a typical neighborhood in Japan with group sharing activity. |

| |Pair or Team Skits in the target language to rehearse various language structures in context. |

| |Peer Evaluation of fluency and accuracy of transactional conversation including student’s ability to respond to clarifying questions |

| |Performance based assessments with quality teacher feedback to help students move toward proficiency. Teacher will utilize technology|

| |tools such as VoiceThread to facilitate collecting evidence of student’s current level of performance. |

| |Differentiate instruction based on information received through frequent formative assessments, and provide additional support or |

| |assistance will be provided through front row seating with cooperative team support, additional small group work sessions before and |

| |after school, or at lunch, and private tutoring sessions if necessary. If possible, teacher will request a hotel concierge to allow |

| |two GT students to job shadow for one day to see practical job application of this knowledge. |

| |

|To assess the Student Learning Objective, use the “Rubric for Rating the Quality of Student Learning Objectives” attachment |

|Results | |

SLO Rating Scale

Teacher should attach the class record for students assessed. Teacher should also have available accompanying student assessments and scored rubrics.

|Rating rubric for teachers with a class of 5 or more students. |

|☐ Highly Effective |☐ Effective |☐ Developing |☐ Ineffective |

| | | | |

|At least 90-100% of students met or |At least 75-89% of students met or |At least 60-74% of students met or |Fewer than 60% of students met or |

|exceeded expected target. |exceeded expected target. |exceeded expected target. |exceeded expected target. |

|Rating rubric for teachers with a class of 4 or fewer students. |

|☐ Highly Effective |☐ Effective |☐ Developing |☐ Ineffective |

| | | | |

|Based on individual growth outcomes, all|Based on individual growth outcomes, all|Based on individual growth outcomes, |Based on individual growth outcomes, no |

|students met expected targets and some |students met expected targets. |some students met or exceeded expected |students met expected targets. |

|exceeded the targets. | |targets. | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download