1. . Topic: Writing Scales

2. Courtney Kavanaugh Geneva Elementary School Val Brown Jackson Heights Middle School Kim Dansereau Hagerty High School

3.  A re Respectful of Other’s Opinions and Listen with an Open Mind; Limit the Use of Electronics for Breaks  C ollaborate in Group Work  T ake Responsibility for Engaging in Learning and Continuous Growth It’s Okay to have Fun! Suffering is Optional.

4. http://www.havefunteaching.com/worksheets/graphic-organizers/kwl-kwhl/kwl-graphic-organizer-landscape.pdf

7.  http://www.marzanoresearch.com/site/ http://www.marzanoresearch.com/site/

8. Participants will be able to develop a scale for tracking student progress toward achieving a learning goal.

9. Learning Goal: Participant will be able to develop a scale for tracking student progress toward achieving Score: the learning goal. 4.0 Participant will design unobtrusive and obtrusive assessments to evaluate 2.0, 3.0, & 4.0 student performances. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 Participant will construct a scale to track student progress toward achieving a learning goal. Scales should:  be related to the learning goal  articulate the levels of performance using the taxonomy  be written in student language  provide consistent feedback to students  encourage students to improve. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 Participant recognizes and describes specific terminology such as:  Learning Continuum  Target Learning Goal  Simpler Content  More Complex Content Participant is able to communicate a clear learning goal.  Goal is a statement of what a student will know or be able to do.  Goal is not written as an activity or assignment.  Goal supports the standards/benchmark for the course. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 2.0 content 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

10. What Marzano’s research says - High Probability Strategies - Marzano Research Laboratory

11.  A Scale is an attempt to create a continuum that articulates distinct levels of knowledge and skill relative to a specific topic.  It can be thought of as an applied version of a learning progression.  A well written scale should make it easy for teachers to design and score assessment tasks that can be used to generate both formative and summative scores. - Dr. Robert Marzano

12. Courtesy: Hamilton Elementary 1 st Grade Team Instructional Excellence & Equity

13. Scale Examples Cont.

14. Monitor Learning with Scales & Formative Assessments to Track Student Progress & Inform Instruction Plan Activities & Assignments to support the Learning Goal Develop Units with Multiple Learning (Lesson) Objectives Generate Assessments Formative and Summative Create Clear Learning Goals & Develop Scales Align with Standards for Learning Over Time A Scale is written for a single Learning Goal. Unpack Standards/Benchmarks Effectively "Chunk" the Standards (Combine, or Break-Apart Standards/Benchmarks) Instructional Excellence & Equity

16. A learning goal identifies what students will learn or be able to do as a result of instruction, separate from what they do to demonstrate the learning. Learning activities and assignments help students reach learning goals. MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN LEARNING GOALS AND LEARNING ACTIVITIES OR ASSIGNMENTS

17. SubjectLearning GoalActivityAssignment ChemistryStudents will be able to describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence. Students will watch a video that recreates the experimental results that lead to changes in that atomic model. In small groups, students will design and construct 3D atomic models using experimental evidence to support their models to assess understanding/ Read pp 647-682 and complete a graphic organizer and the chapter review questions. Instructional Excellence & Equity

19. Organize Learning Goals into a Scale Advanced = 4.0 More Complex Content Proficient = 3.0 Target Learning Goal (Complex Content) Progressing = 2.0 Simpler Content

20. Why is this not an example of a scale or rubric? 3D Atomic Model ProjectPossible PointsScore Creativity15 Listening/Following Directions10 Followed Criteria10 Team Effort10 Structural accuracy15 Description of experimental results supporting this model 20 Atomic parts clearly labeled20 Learning Goal: The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence Instructional Excellence & Equity

22. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: Predict how atomic models might have evolved if different experimental results had been obtained by Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence Explain why Thomson’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support his plum-pudding model. Explain why Rutherford’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support his nuclear model. Explain why Bohr’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support planetary model. Explain the experimental results that disproved the planetary model and how the results support the quantum atomic model No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: Proton electron model energy level cathode Cathode ray tube subatomic particle neutron nucleus excited state ground state anode triboluminescence emission spectra The student will: Draw and label the atomic models of Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr Identify by name the experiments that lead to each model being discarded Describe the procedure used for each experiment Summarize the important results of each experiment No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

23. Development of a Scale for Student Learning: Example Student Learning Goal: ScaleComments Score 4.0 Score 3.0 Score 2.0 Score 1.0With help, partial success Score 0.0Even with help, no success The student will: -define model, subatomic particle, proton, electron, nucleus -understand results of historical experiments and previous atomic model representations Predict how atomic models might have evolved if different experimental results had been obtained. Instructional Excellence & Equity Students will be able to describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence.

24. EXERCISE 3.1 Simpler and More Complex Content for Learning Goals DANCE PARTNERS http://www.marzanoresearch.com/reproducibles/designing_teaching.aspx#reproducibles

25. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

28. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

29. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence The student will No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: model subatomic particle proton electron neutron nucleus The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

30. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence The student will No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: model subatomic particle proton electron neutron nucleus The student will: Draw and label the atomic models of Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr Identify by name the major experiments that lead to each model being discarded Describe the procedure used for each experiment Summarize the important results of each experiment No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

31. 4.0 In addition to Score 3.0, in-depth inferences and applications that go beyond instruction to the standard The student will: Predict how atomic models might have evolved if different experimental results had been obtained by Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 The student will describe changes in the atomic model over time and why those changes were necessitated by experimental evidence Explain why Thomson’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support his plum-pudding model. Explain why Rutherford’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support his nuclear model. Explain why Bohr’s experimental results necessitated changing the atomic model and how the results obtained support his planetary model. Explain the experimental results that disproved the planetary model and how the results support the quantum atomic model The student will No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content (simple or complex) 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 The student recognizes and describes specific terminology such as: model subatomic particle proton electron neutron nucleus The student will: Draw and label the atomic models of Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr Identify by name the major experiments that lead to each model being discarded Describe the procedure used for each experiment Summarize the important results of each experiment No major errors or omissions regarding the simpler details and processes but major errors or omissions regarding the more complex ideas and processes 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

32. ScaleComments Score 4.0 Inferential Understanding (Beyond Standards) More Complex Content Score 3.0 Essential Complex Content (Based on the Standards) Target Learning Goal Score 2.0 Essential Foundational Knowledge Simpler Content  Start with Score 3.0 and write your Target Learning Goal  Continue to develop Score 2.0 and Score 4.0  Include specific indicators that would demonstrate acceptable performance for that score.

33.  Share your scale

34. Learning Goal: Participant will be able to develop and use a scale to track student progress toward achieving Score: the learning goal. 4.0 Participant will design unobtrusive and obtrusive assessments to evaluate 2.0, 3.0, & 4.0 student performances. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 4.0 content 3.5In addition to score 3.0 performance, in-depth inferences and applications with partial success 3.0 Participant will construct and use a scale to track student progress toward achieving the learning goal. Scales should:  be related to the learning goal  articulate the levels of performance using the taxonomy  be written in student language  provide consistent feedback to students  encourage students to improve. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 3.0 content 2.5No major errors or omissions regarding 2.0 content and partial knowledge of the 3.0 content 2.0 Participant recognizes and describes specific terminology such as:  Learning Continuum  Target Learning Goal  Simpler Content  More Complex Content Participant is able to communicate a clear learning goal.  Goal is a statement of what a student will know or be able to do.  Goal is not written as an activity or assignment.  Goal supports the standards/benchmark for the course. No major errors or omissions regarding the score 2.0 content 1.5Partial knowledge of the score 2.0 content, but major errors or omissions regarding score 3.0 content 1.0 With help, a partial understanding of some of the simpler details and processes and some of the more complex ideas and processes. 0.5With help, a partial understanding of the score 2.0 content, but not the score 3.0 content 0.0 Even with help, no understanding or skill demonstrated Instructional Excellence & Equity

35.  Parking Lot Questions? We accept learning as the fundamental purpose of our school and therefore are willing to examine all practices in light of the impact on learning. - DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, Many