College of Arts and Sciences

Department of Education

Candidate Assessment of Performance (CAP) Observation Form

Candidate Name: Hannah Richards Date: 11/08/18

Observation #: _2___ Type (Announced/Unannounced): Announced

Observed
Raymond Ostendorf (Program Supervisor)
By:
1.A.4: Well Structured Lessons 2.B.1 Safe Learning Environment
(#1 Announced, #1 Unannounced) (#1 Unannounced)
Focus 1.B.2: Adjustments to Practice 2.D.2 High Expectations
X
Elements: (#2 Announced, #2 Unannounced) (#1 Announced)
2.A.3: Meeting Diverse Needs
X 4.A.1 Reflective Practice
(#2 Announced)
Date of
11/08/18 Time (start/end): 8:16 – 9:08 AM
Lesson:
Content Topic/Lesson Objective: 10th Grade Honors English, MCAS Prep

Lesson objective: BTEOTL, SWBAT independently read “When Mindfulness Meets the Classroom” and
“Instead of Detention, These Students Get Meditation” closely by highlighting and annotating key details.
Students will draw evidence from text to answer questions in their MCAS packets. Students will
individually meet with me to go over their analytical essays.

X Whole Group Small Group X One-on-One Other

Active Evidence Collection (see attached documentation including lesson plan and data collected during
observation) occurred during the observation and is synthesized and categorized below.

Element Evidence

Ms. Richards’s lesson featured a challenging, measurable, manageable lesson objective.

By the end of the lesson, she will be able to determine whether her students met the
lesson objective based on their answers on the MCAS packet as well as less formally by
seeing how/where her students were highlighting and annotating while working
independently throughout the lesson.

Ms. Richards’s lesson featured a well-established routine where the students enter the
1.A.4 classroom, retrieve their binders and journal quietly for the first few minutes. The
prompts change daily and set the stage for the lesson at hand. The prompt for the lesson
observed was: “I will meet with you each individually to discuss your analytical essays.
Write in full sentences at least [sic] three questions or concerns you have to share with
me. Also, write at least three strengths that you feel as shown through your essay.”

As is typical, Ms. Richards had the agenda for the class posted as well as an essential
question (that has been continuous with the class through most/if not all of her
practicum). There was homework assigned for the class (reminder given at the end of the
 lesson). The final draft of their analytical essays will be due next week.

All students had the materials necessary to be prepared for the lesson, including MCAS
materials, highlighters, binders for journaling, etc. Students were working independently
for the lesson. Seven students were selected to conference with Ms. Richards in the
lesson to get personalized feedback on their analytical essays – recently completed at the
end of reading To Kill a Mockingbird.

Technology was featured seamlessly to support student learning – the journal prompt
was posted, several students looked up to remember the prompt when journaling. Light
music was played during the independent work/reading.

In the CAP Pre-Conference Planning Form, Ms. Richards notes that “my students
struggled in different ways with their analytical essays. So, instead of having one lesson
on the essays, I have decided to meet with students individually in order to meet their
needs.”

In planning for the lesson, Ms. Richards generated a list of the students. The list ranked-
ordered the students for her conferencing. The students at the top of the lists needed,
she determined, would benefit the most from individual conferencing. The students at
1.B.2
the middle/end of the list would either be fine without the conferencing, or had enough
written feedback that they would be okay to complete it independently. There were
three students on the list who did not complete the rough drafts of the essays, yet.

Ms. Richards decisions about the order for conferencing were determined by what she
was noticing when providing feedback on the rough drafts, providing the opportunity for
her to reinforce the feedback and provide other individualized interventions/supports on
their writing.

In addition to the evidence provided under “Adjustments to Practice” that overlaps with
“Meeting Diverse Needs,” Ms. Richards noted in her CAP Pre-Conference Planning form
that in the past few lessons, “students have worked in groups, so this [lesson] is an
opportunity for students to work alone which will appeal to students who prefer
individual work over group work.”

Students were permitted to listen to music while they were reading the MCAS passages,
highlighting, and annotating. Several students had their ear buds in and/but remained
2.A.3
engaged throughout. Soft music was playing in the background of the lesson.

Direction were on the board, in addition to being provided verbally; they were also
provided in a handout available to all students (UDL consideration – list in lesson plan and
executed in delivery).

Lesson plan included a student who may need a redirection and more explicit directions.
It was not clear based on the observation if the student received these, because I
(program supervisor) didn’t have a seating chart to track.
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of Education

Students met each of Ms. Richards’s behavior expectations for the lesson, with one possible
student exception described below. Ms. Richards gave 3-4 behavior reminders during the
time between students conferencing with her – gentle reminders to be on track, as students
were engaged in a discussion related to the content of one of the MCAS passages.

One student wearing a white hoodie was out using the restroom for roughly ten minutes of
the lesson, followed the routine of signing-out, did not sign back in. The same student had
his ear buds in before the class had been given permission to listen to music.

Students know the routine for journaling and it was executed fairly quickly – transition out
2.B.1
of journaling to the formal lesson around 8:25.

Ms. Richards built on the students’ familiarity of what would be expected for the lesson
today, building on strategies from an earlier MCAS review in the week as well as the type of
annotations and close reading strategies they had been practicing with each chapter of To
Kill a Mockingbird.

Ms. Richards featured several (~3) whole class check for understandings, asking for thumbs
up/thumbs down to check-in about understanding of directions before releasing the
students to complete the close reading.

Ms. Richards pushed one student’s thinking further in the recap of expectations for the
MCAS close read, as the student offered “theme, tone” as elements the students should be
reading for while reading the MCAS passages.

Seven students (about a third of the class) were given targeted feedback through individual
conferences with Ms. Richards. All students who have completed the rough drafts were
given individualized feedback, which they will be expected to use/respond to in time for
their final drafts due next week.

All students (including those who were conferencing) were encouraged to email Ms.
Richards if any problems persist on the drafts between now and when the final drafts are
2.D.2
due. Ms. Richards is clearly making herself accessible to the students in and out of the
class.

Ms. Richards noted in the CAP Pre-Conference Planning form and in our debrief after the
lesson that a few of the students she had selected to conference with were also at a high
level of readiness for writing and she wanted to use the conference time to push them to go
even further in their essays.

Evidence of student work (Facebook pages from To Kill A Mockingbird) are displayed on the
bulletin board. Based on appearance, there is a range of students products being displayed.

4.A.1
Ms. Richards has been using the feedback and a goal we set during the formative
 assessment meeting to “meet diverse learning needs”. Clearer evidence of her addressing
this element of CAP is provided.

Ms. Richards is candid and honest in her reflective writing (e.g., CAP Pre-Conference) about
areas she is working to improve in her teaching in the practicum.

In the formative assessment, I had suggested Lemov technique “Strong Voice” and I could
hear at least one example where she rephrased a direction to the class from a question to a
directive, providing clarity to the students that what she was saying is necessary and not
optional at that time.

Focused Feedback

Adjustment to Practice
• Clear evidence of care and planning in the lesson, attending to each
student’s needs in their writing as they move from rough draft to final
draft.

Meeting Diverse Needs

• I believe that this approach to the lesson plays to Ms. Richards’s
strengths. She has several years of experience at WNE’s Writing Center
Reinforcement working individually with students on their writing, goal setting, and
Area/Action: adopting a constructivist approach to the tutoring. Based on the
(strengths) comments she was providing the students in the class in her
conferencing, as well as in her writing, she is creating the space for the
students to get the scaffolding they need to take their writing to the
next stage. It was a joy seeing Ms. Richards teach this lesson, because I
could hear how she was sharing her excitement and precise feedback
based on the drafts she had graded. It is a skill to be able to
deliver/tailor feedback individually to students that is encouraging and
also pushes them further along in their writing (without falling in the
trap of doing the work for them). Nice job with it today! J

Safe Learning Environment

• The environment was never unsafe, but I would suggest that Ms.
Richards still ensure that all students are on track and are accountable
in between the individual conferencing. Gently (even not so gently,
Refinement
really) calling out student who are off-track, or catching a student who
Area/Action:
may be gone for too long, etc. – balancing management responsibilities
(areas for
amid the one-on-one conferencing.
improvement)
• Along these lines, I’d still suggest Lemov’s technique on “Strong Voice”
the skills he outlines can help Ms. Richards develop a “teacher
presence” that naturally takes time. On pg. 415, Lemov describes “Do
Not Talk Over” that can be helpful to ensure all students are “with you”
during key transitions, especially at the end of the lesson with the
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of Education
reminder about homework, etc.