Section 3

MSED ELEMENTARY PORTFOLIO PROJECT 1
Section Three: Teacher Candidate Artifacts
Artifact #1: Author Study SMARTNotebook Presentation …………………...…. 21
Artifact #2: Assessing Student Math Learning ……….……………………….…. 24
Artifact #3: Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson ………………… 92
Artifact #4: Survey Research Assignment………………………….……………. 105
Artifact #5: ELED Assessment and Instruction Plan.……………………...……. 119
Artifact #6: Annotated Bibliography Assignment…….…………………………. 148
Artifact #7: Child Abuse Certificate ……………………………………………... 157
Artifact #8: Fieldwork/Participation Reflection – MSED ELED 504.…………… 160
Introduction
Building from Section two of this portfolio where I presented my background experiences and
education, Section three of this portfolio provides a compilation of eight artifacts completed over
the course of my education at Medaille that collectively demonstrate my readiness to enter the
teaching profession. This readiness comes from having gained experience, as included below, in
the areas of planning, instruction, assessment, engagement with students, other teachers and with
parents. Further, my readiness is demonstrated through having worked with, observed or learned
through theory and research how to support a diverse classroom. Below you will find examples
when I have completed planning, instruction, student and self-assessment in a literacy teaching
capacity. There is an in depth example of math lesson planning, assessment and re-engagement
in a model that resembles the EdTPA. Finally, below are examples of my use of technology as
well as my communication with parents to understand their interest in use of technology as a way
to be in contact and learn of the progress and activities of their child at school.
[Back to Table of Contents]

Artifacts & Rationales
Eight artifacts are included below. Each starts on a new page with a rationale provided for
why it has been included in this portfolio and a list of standards to which the work I conducted in
the artifact connect, further making the case for my readiness to become a teacher.

Artifact #1: Author Study SMARTNotebook Presentation.
Rationale
Artifact #1 is an author study of James Ransome delivered in the format of a
SMARTNotebook presentation targeted for face to face delivery of curriculum and engagement
with grade 5 students. The SMARTNotebook is a demonstration of my competency in
technology for use as a tool in the classroom. The development of this presentation involved a
merging of the planning and instruction skills I have gained in my education at Medaille College
being applied in a technology tool. Advantages of this technology tool, as aligned with best
practices of differentiated instruction (Tomlinson, C., 1999),
To further demonstrate how the SMARTNotebook Author Study presented in this Artifact #1
provides a strong example for my ability to be a teacher, the work conducted in preparing and
delivering this artifact can be categorized under the Standards listed below.
 InTASC Standards
Standard 1: Learner Development
1(b) The teacher creates developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into
account individual learners’strengths, interests, and needs and that enables each
learner to advance and accelerate his/her learning.
1(d) The teacher understands how learning occurs-- how learners construct
knowledge, acquire skills, and develop disciplined thinking processes--and knows
how to use instructional strategies that promote student learning.
1(g) The teacher understands the role of language and culture in learning and knows
how to modify instruction to make language comprehensible and instruction
relevant, accessible, and challenging.
Standard 2: Learning Differences
2(b) The teacher makes appropriate and timely provisions (e.g., pacing for individual
rates of growth, task demands, communication, assessment, and response modes) for
individual students with particular learning differences or needs.
2(d) The teacher brings multiple perspectives to the discussion of content, including
attention to learners’ personal, family, and community experiences and cultural
norms.
2(k) The teacher knows how to access information about the values of diverse
cultures and communities and how to incorporate learners’ experiences, cultures, and

community resources into instruction.

2(n) The teacher makes learners feel valued and helps them learn to value each other.
Standard 3: Learning Environments
3(d) The teacher manages the learning environment to actively and equitably engage
learners by organizing, allocating, and coordinating the resources of time,
space, and learners’ attention.
3(g) The teacher promotes responsible learner use of interactive technologies to
extend the possibilities for learning locally and globally.
3(l) The teacher understands how learner diversity can affect communication and
knows how to communicate effectively in differing environments.
Standard 4:
4(g) The teacher uses supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure
accessibility and relevance for all learners.
Standard 5: Application of Content
5(h) The teacher develops and implements supports for learner literacy development
across content areas.
5(l) The teacher understands how to use digital and interactive technologies for
efficiently and effectively achieving specific learning goals.
Standard 7: Planning for instruction
7(c) The teacher develops appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and
provides multiple ways to demonstrate knowledge and skill.
 TEAC/CAEP Claims
Claim 2
Medaille College graduates meet the needs of diverse learners through effective
pedagogy and best teaching practices
 NYS Ethics
Principal 2
Educators create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for all.
Educators apply their professional knowledge to promote student learning. They
know the curriculum and utilize a range of strategies and assessments to address
differences. Educators develop and implement programs based upon a strong
understanding of human development and learning theory. They support a challenging
learning environment. They advocate for necessary resources to teach to higher levels
of learning. They establish and maintain clear standards of behavior and civility.
Educators are role models, displaying the habits of mind and work necessary to
develop and apply knowledge while simultaneously displaying a curiosity and
enthusiasm for learning. They invite students to become active, inquisitive, and
discerning individuals who reflect upon and monitor their own learning.
 Ontario Ethics
Respect
Intrinsic to the ethical standard of Respect are trust and fair-mindedness. Members
honor human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. In their
professional practice, they model respect for spiritual and cultural values, social
justice, confidentiality, freedom, democracy and the environment.
Care

The ethical standard of Care includes compassion, acceptance, interest and insight for
developing students’ potential. Members express their commitment to students’ well-
being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment and empathy in
practice.
 Common Core Learning Standards for (Math, ELA, & Social Studies), NYS
Standards for (all other subjects)
NYS P-12 Common Core Learning Standards for Social Studies
B. Chronological Reasoning and Causation
Identify causes and effects, using examples from his/her life or from a current
event or history.
NYS Next Gen Science
3-PS2-2. Make observations and/or measurements of an object’s motion to
provide evidence that a pattern can be used to predict future motion.
The patterns of an object’s motion in various situations can be observed and
measured; when that past motion exhibits a regular pattern, future motion can be
predicted from it. (Boundary: Technical terms, such as magnitude, velocity,
momentum, and vector quantity, are not introduced at this level, but the concept
that some quantities need both size and direction to be described is developed.)
(3-PS2-2)
NYS P-12 Common Core Learning Standards for English Language Arts
NYS Reading Standards for Literature Grade 3
Craft and Structure
4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text,
distinguishing literal from non-literal language.
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
7. Explain how specific aspects of a text’s illustrations contribute to what
is conveyed by the words in a story (e.g., create mood, emphasize aspects
of a character or setting).
 Ontario Ministry of Education Curriculum Expectations (students from Canada)
Ontario Social Studies
This concept requires students to determine the factors that affect or lead to
something (e.g., an event, situation, action, interaction) as well as its impact or
effects. Students study the causes and consequences of various types of events,
situations, and interactions in both the natural environment and human society
Ontario Science
Understanding Matter and Energy. Forces causing Movement.
2.3 investigate, through experimentation, the effects of pushing, pulling, and other
forces on the shape and stability of simple structures (e.g., the effect of adding one
or more struts on the strength of a tower; the effect of adding ties on the strength
of a bridge; the effect of adding weight to the base of a tower on the stability of
the tower)
Ontario Language - Reading
Text Features
2.3 identify a variety of text features and explain how they help readers
understand texts (e.g., table of contents, charts and chart titles, headings, an index,
a glossary, graphs, illustrations, pictures, diagrams, hyperlinks, a menu)

Reading Unfamiliar Words

3.2 predict the meaning of and rapidly solve unfamiliar words using different
types of cues, including:
• semantic (meaning) cues (e.g., prefixes, suffixes, base words, phrases,
sentences, and visuals that activate existing knowledge of oral and written
language);
• syntactic (language structure) cues (e.g., word order, language patterns,
punctuation);
• graphophonic (phonological and graphic) cues (e.g., onset and rime;
syllables; similarities between words with common spelling patterns and
unknown words; words within words)
Teacher prompt (for cross-checking of cues): “Does the word sound right and
make sense given your understanding of the text?”
 ISTE (for technology)

Standard 2a
Design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools
(SMARTNotebook) to promote student learning and creativity.
Standard 3a
Demonstrate fluency in technology systems and the transfer of current knowledge to
new technologies and situations.
 ILA (for literacy) (International Reading Association, 2010)

Standard 2: Curriculum and Instruction
Candidates use instructional approaches, materials, and an integrated,
comprehensive, balanced curriculum to support student learning in reading and
writing.
 Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) ((CEC), 2018)

Standard 1
Maintaining challenging expectations for individuals with exceptionalities to
develop the highest possible learning outcomes and quality of life potential in
ways that respect their dignity, culture, language, and background

Artifact #2: Assessing Student Math Learning.
Rationale
The development of Artifact #2, Assessing Student Math Learning is modelled directly from the
EdTPA certification requirement that I will need to complete in order to be certified in the State of
New York following completion of my studies at Medaille College.
There are multiple reasons I chose to include this item as an artifact in my portfolio. More
specifically, this artifact demonstrates my competencies in each of planning for instruction,
assessment, learner accommodation, diversity and meeting math curriculum standards in my
instruction content.
The artifact begins with a description of the classroom, students, learning environment and then
moves into two math lesson plans meeting grade 5 curriculum for geometry and measurement in
both New York State and Ontario. The lesson plans utilize multiple teaching strategies including
mental math, small collaborative group work, grand discussion, gallery walk and measurement of
real world objects and using improvised units.
A key component worth mentioning in this artifact is that of an assessment. As per InTASC
Standard 8, the assessment was both for feedback to the teacher, each student and, importantly, for
deciding if some students would need to be instructed in a different manner.

The formal and summative assessment for this learning segment asked students to build and
measure volume and provide verbal reasoning to the teacher to reflect content from this learning
segment. The assessment also repeated previous year’s learning of perimeter and area calculation in
order to confirm the ability of the students to apply that earlier foundational work.
Following the assessment, because individual students learn in different ways (Gardner, H., 1993)
and in alignment with InTASC standards listed below, the instruction approach was changed for a
small group of students needing re-engagement. The change involved moving from using tangible
forms to visualize the added volumes to this time giving the instruction more of a story-based
approach. In the latter, the small group of students requiring re-engagement heard and worked
through a real-life story approach about a candy store to learn the math geography and measurement
content.
Because all students needed to be learning while the small group was being re-engaged,
independent learning centers were set up for the rest of the class to practice the skills and knowledge
they already gained from the lesson. Finally, in order to facilitate this small group approach working
in the classroom, classroom management and group interaction best practices were emphasized. A
clear emphasis on classroom management early in the year helps students to maintain better work
ethic throughout the year (Pickering, D., Marzano, J. S., & Marzano, R. J., 2003).

Upon review of each of the following categories of standards, those listed under each were
selected because they are a reflection of the competencies described above and achieved through this
artifact.

1(e) The teacher understands that each learner’s cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and
physical development influences learning and knows how to make instructional decisions
that build on learners’ strengths and needs.
1(i) The teacher is committed to using learners’ strengths as a basis for growth, and their
misconceptions as opportunities for learning.
2(a) The teacher designs, adapts, and delivers instruction to address each student’s diverse
learning strengths and needs and creates opportunities for students to demonstrate
their learning in different ways.
3(e) The teacher uses a variety of methods to engage learners in evaluating the learning
environment and collaborates with learners to make appropriate adjustments.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge
4(c) The teacher engages learners in applying methods of inquiry and standards of evidence
used in the discipline.
5(b) The teacher engages learners in applying content knowledge to real world problems
through the lens of interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
Standard 6: Assessment
6(e) The teacher engages learners in multiple ways of demonstrating knowledge and skill as
part of the assessment process.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction
7(j) The teacher understands the strengths and needs of individual learners and how to plan
instruction that is responsive to these strengths and needs.
7(k) The teacher knows a range of evidence-based instructional strategies, resources, and
technological tools and how to use them effectively to plan instruction that meets diverse
learning needs.

7(l) The teacher knows when and how to adjust plans based on assessment information and
learner responses.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies
8(b) The teacher continuously monitors student learning, engages learners in assessing their
progress, and adjusts instruction in response to student learning needs.
Claim 1
Medaille College graduates know the subject matter in their certification area(s).
Claim 2
Medaille College graduates meet the needs of diverse learners through effective pedagogy and
Best Teaching Practices.
Claim 3
Medaille College graduates are caring educators.
 NYS Ethics
Principle 1
Educators nurture the intellectual, physical, emotional, social, and civic potential of each
student. Educators promote growth in all students through the integration of intellectual,
physical, emotional, social and civic learning. They respect the inherent dignity and worth of
each individual. Educators help students to value their own identity, learn more about their
cultural heritage, and practice social and civic responsibilities. They help students to reflect
on their own learning and connect it to their life experience. They engage students in
activities that encourage diverse approaches and solutions to issues, while providing a range
of ways for students to demonstrate their abilities and learning. They foster the development
of students who can analyze, synthesize, evaluate and communicate information effectively.
Principle 2
Educators create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for all. Educators
apply their professional knowledge to promote student learning. They know the curriculum
and utilize a range of strategies and assessments to address differences. Educators develop
and implement programs based upon a strong understanding of human development and
learning theory. They support a challenging learning environment. They advocate for
necessary resources to teach to higher levels of learning. They establish and maintain clear
standards of behavior and civility. Educators are role models, displaying the habits of mind
and work necessary to develop and apply knowledge while simultaneously displaying a
curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. They invite students to become active, inquisitive, and
discerning individuals who reflect upon and monitor their own learning.

 Ontario Ethics (students from Canada)

Care
The ethical standard of Care includes compassion, acceptance, interest and
insight for developing students’ potential. Members express their commitment to
students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment
and empathy in practice.
Respect
Intrinsic to the ethical standard of Respect are trust and fair-mindedness. Members honor
human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. In their professional practice,
they model respect for spiritual and cultural values, social justice,
confidentiality, freedom, democracy and the environment.
 Common Core Learning Standards for (Math, ELA, & Social Studies), NYS Standards
for (all other subjects)
Measurement & Data 5.MD
Geometric measurement: understand concepts of volume and relate volume to multiplication
and to addition.
CCSS 5.MD.3. Recognize volume as an attribute of solid figures and understand concepts of
volume measurement.
CSS 5.MD.3.a. A cube with side length 1 unit, called a “unit cube,” is said to have “one cubic
unit” of volume, and can be used to measure volume.
CSS 5.MD.3.b. A solid figure which can be packed without gaps or overlaps using n unit
cubes is said to have a volume of n cubic units
Measurement & Data CCSS 5.MD.C.
Geometric measurement: understand concepts of volume and relate volume to multiplication
and to addition.
CCSS 5.MD.4 Measure volumes by counting unit cubes, using cubic cm, cubic in, cubic ft,
and improvised units.
CCSS 5.MD.5.b. Apply the formulas V = l × w × h and V = b × h for rectangular prisms to
find volumes of right rectangular prisms with wholenumber edge lengths in the context of
solving real world and mathematical problems.
Measurement & Data 5.MD
CCSS.M.4. c. Recognize volume as additive. Find volumes of solid figures composed of two
non-overlapping right rectangular prisms by adding the volumes of the non-overlapping
parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.3.1.b
Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions (e.g., gaining the floor in respectful ways, listening
to others with care, speaking one at a time about the topics and texts under discussion).

Grade 5 – Measurement
• determine the relationships among units and measurable attributes, including the area of a
rectangle and the volume of a rectangular prism – determine, through investigation using
stacked congruent rectangular layers of concrete materials, the relationship between the
height, the area of the base, and the volume of a rectangular prism, and generalize to develop
the formula (i.e., Volume = area of base x height) (Sample problem: Create a variety of
rectangular prisms using connecting cubes. For each rectangular prism, record the area of the
base, the height, and the volume on a chart. Identify relationships.);

Artifact #3: Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson Video.
Rationale
As part of my education at Medaille College, I had the opportunity not only to learn the
process of guided reading (Scholastic, n.d.; Pinnell & Fountas, 2008) but also the chance to
video record myself instructing for the sake of personal reflection and improvement, as per
InTASC Standard 9 and NYS Ethics Principle 3. This lesson involved working with four grade 3
students through vocabulary, modeling reading, guided reading, independent reading and
teaching students to use a predicting as a comprehension strategy for reading. With respect to
assessment, during the instructional portion of this artifact, I collected formative informal
assessments in the form of notes about each student’s learning and behavior in order to guide my
future instruction of each student.
This artifact also involved the use of technology competencies in recording, storing, editing
and reviewing a video of the lesson. Finally, this artifact demonstrates the competency of
professional development because the video review and reflection and assessment by my
instructor was very helpful in my learning process. The process of learning guided reading and
seeing myself instruct were pivotal in my learning process at Medaille.
The approach of guided reading is one that demonstrates care on behalf of the teacher for each
individual student and the advancement of students, as per Ontario ethics and NYS Ethics
principle 1.
As can be read in more detail in the reflection artifact below, my review of the video involved
direct identification of where I met target curriculum standards. For example, when I went over
the Guided Reading Rules for this lesson with the students, that was to establish an environment

of respect and a space where each student can learn. This happened in the video at 7:30 and
aligns with the curriculum standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.3.1.b
In a second example, at 28:21 in the video, the students were engaged to find a word in the
text that some didn’t know the meaning of. This aligns with the curriculum standards
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.3.4.a Use sentence-level context as a clue to the meaning of a word or
phrase. This was in follow-up to the purpose set for the vocabulary at the start of the lesson (2:20
and 3:26).
In a third example, the lesson started with a strategy lesson and modeling of how to predict
what would happen in the story based on existing knowledge of the characters and drawing on
students prior knowledge as per InTASC Standard 2. This approach aligned with the curriculum
standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.3.3 Describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits,
motivations, or feelings) and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events. The
students learned the literacy strategy of predicting events in the story based on an assessment of
character traits This could be seen at 3:50 in the video.
selected because they are a reflection of the competencies described above and achieved through
this artifact.

1(d) The teacher understands how learning occurs-- how learners construct knowledge,
acquire skills, and develop disciplined thinking processes--and knows how to use
instructional strategies that promote student learning.
2(c) The teacher designs instruction to build on learners’ prior knowledge and
experiences, allowing learners to accelerate as they demonstrate their understandings.
2(d) The teacher brings multiple perspectives to the discussion of content, including
attention to learners’ personal, family, and community experiences and cultural norms.

2(e) The teacher incorporates tools of language development into planning and
instruction, including strategies for making content accessible to English language
learners and for evaluating and supporting their development of English proficiency.
3(d) The teacher manages the learning environment to actively and equitably engage
learners by organizing, allocating, and coordinating the resources of time, space, and
learners’ attention.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge
4(d) The teacher stimulates learner reflection on prior content knowledge, links new
concepts to familiar concepts, and makes connections to learners’ experiences.
4(h) The teacher creates opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic
language in their content.
5(s) The teacher values flexible learning environments that encourage learner exploration,
discovery, and expression across content areas.
Standard 6: Assessment
6(j) The teacher understands the differences between formative and summative
applications of assessment and knows how and when to use each.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction
7(j) The teacher understands the strengths and needs of individual learners and how to
plan instruction that is responsive to these strengths and needs.
Standard 8:
8(d) The teacher varies his/her role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator,
coach, audience) in relation to the content and purposes of instruction and the needs of
learners.
8(k) The teacher knows how to apply a range of developmentally, culturally, and
linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to achieve learning goals.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice
9(g) The teacher understands and knows how to use a variety of self-assessment and
problem-solving strategies to analyze and reflect on his/her practice and to plan for
adaptations/adjustments.
Claim 2
Medaille College graduates meet the needs of diverse learners through effective pedagogy
and best teaching practices
Claim 3
 NYS Ethics
Principle 1
Educators nurture the intellectual, physical, emotional, social, and civic potential of each
student. Educators promote growth in all students through the integration of intellectual,
physical, emotional, social and civic learning. They respect the inherent dignity and
worth of each individual. Educators help students to value their own identity, learn more
about their cultural heritage, and practice social and civic responsibilities. They help
students to reflect on their own learning and connect it to their life experience. They

engage students in activities that encourage diverse approaches and solutions to issues,
while providing a range of ways for students to demonstrate their abilities and learning.
They foster the development of students who can analyze, synthesize, evaluate and
communicate information effectively.
Principle 3
Educators commit to their own learning in order to develop their practice. Educators
recognize that professional knowledge and development are the foundations of their
practice. They know their subject matter, and they understand how students learn.
Educators respect the reciprocal nature of learning between educators and students. They
engage in a variety of individual and collaborative learning experiences essential to
develop professionally and to promote student learning. They draw on and contribute to
various forms of educational research to improve their own practice.
 Ontario Ethics (students from Canada),
Care
students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional
judgment and empathy in practice.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.3.3
Describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits, motivations, or feelings) and
explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.3.1.b
Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions (e.g., gaining the floor in respectful
ways, listening to others with care, speaking one at a time about the topics and
texts under discussion).
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.3.4.a
Use sentence-level context as a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase.
Standard 5: Engage in professional growth and leadership
Teachers continuously improve their professional practice, model lifelong
learning, and exhibit leadership in their school and professional community by
promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources.
 ILA (for literacy)
Candidates use instructional approaches, materials, and an integrated,
comprehensive, balanced curriculum to support student learning in reading and
writing.

Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson Video
On July 29, 2017, I provided a guided reading lesson to four peers who pretended to be
third grade students. The approach was to get the kids attention, relate to them, and introduce the
reading session; to teach and model a literacy strategy they can use to build on what they know
already and improve their reading comprehension; to have them read and practice the literacy
strategy and to ensure that each child in the group (grouped to be at a similar reading level) was
engaged and participated in the lesson.
The lesson I gave lasted 31 minutes and was captured on video. I have watched the video
back and will reflect upon it in the following text.
In the remainder of this reflection, I will focus on specific aspects as per the reflection
assignment description. These are 1. Promoting a Positive Learning Environment; 2. Engaging
Students in Learning; 3. Deepening Student Learning During Instruction; and 4. Analyzing
teaching. I will make specific references to time points in the video to provide examples to
support my reflection.
1. Promoting a Positive Learning Environment
When I went over the Guided Reading Rules for this lesson with the students, that was to
establish an environment of respect and a space where each student can learn. This happened in
the video at 7:30. This aligns with the curriculum standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.3.1.b
Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions (e.g., gaining the floor in respectful ways, listening to
others with care, speaking one at a time about the topics and texts under discussion).
In addition, throughout the Guided Reading, I made an attempt to connect with each
student by making eye contact with them and by encouraging each student to contribute, calling
them by name to make sure each student feels confident they are being heard and to ensure they

know they will be expected to participate, which for some will be a challenge. I also echoed back
what I heard the students say so they would know I heard them. I feel this approach also assists
in creating a learning environment of modelling how to summarize several ideas. An example of
this is at 25:00 to 26:45.
2. Engaging Students in Learning
a. Explain how the instruction engaged students in developing an essential literacy strategy and
requisite skills.
Students were supported in and did follow agreed-upon rules for discussion. This aligns
with curriculum standards for grade 3 as noted above.
At 28:21 in the video, the students were engaged to find a word in the text that some
didn’t know the meaning of. This aligns with the curriculum standards CCSS.ELA-
Literacy.L.3.4.a Use sentence-level context as a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase. This
was in follow-up to the purpose set for the vocabulary at the start (2:20 and 3:26).
Also, the lesson started with a strategy lesson and modeling of how to predict what will
happen in the story based on what we know about the characters. This aligns with the curriculum
standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.3.3 Describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits,
motivations, or feelings) and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events. The
students learned the literacy strategy of predicting events in the story based on an assessment of
character traits This can be seen at 3:50.
b. Describe how the instruction linked students’ prior academic learning and personal, cultural,
and community assets with new learning.

This story is all about the relationship of a brother and a sister through various events in
their daily lives. At the very start of the lesson in the anticipatory set, the students shared their
personal knowledge about their own experiences with siblings. This approach was used to
engage the students through something they can relate to. This lesson also built on students’
previous academic learning of story features, in this case character traits, so they could think
about the characters as they applied the new predicting strategy modelled for them.
The students had not done predicting previously but by the end of the session, they were
making their own predictions about the book, demonstrating their learning of the skill, as well as
their improved comprehension of the text. One example of this in the lesson begins at 17:15
where the students each provide a prediction of what they think will happen and where I guide
them to connect their prediction back to the text.
3. Deepening Student Learning during Instruction
a. Explain how you elicited and built on student responses to promote thinking and apply the
literacy strategy using requisite skills to comprehend or compose text.
At the end of the reading session, with some input from the students, I recapped all of the
predictions that we made compared to what actually happened in the book. This example is seen
starting at 27:35.
To echo what was answered in the previous section, the students had not done predicting
previously but by the end of the session, they were making their own predictions about the book,
demonstrating their learning of the skill, as well as their improved comprehension of the text.
One example of this in the lesson begins at 17:15 where the students each provide a prediction of
what they think will happen and where I guide them to connect their prediction back to the text.

b. Explain how you modeled the literacy strategy and supported students as they practiced and
applied the literacy strategy in a meaning-based context.
At minute 3:50, I used clear language to set the stage for the strategy, let students know
what to expect and then modelled the strategy starting at 4:49. Following the students’
independent reading for practice purposes (8:55 to 10:42), I worked with the students from 10:42
as they practiced predicting based on what they had read. This was repeated again with a
supported prediction and then the final prediction the students were now able to do on their own
(17:15).
c. Where in the video is there evidence of what the students learned?
After the third practice reading session, the students worked independently and each
came up with a prediction of what they thought would happen which they explained by making
reference to portions of the text, including character traits and actions. This began at 17:15 and
is the evidence that the students learned the predicting strategy. Some of the students did not
know all of the vocabulary words but by looking back through the text or bringing it up when
reading, they learned the meaning of two new vocabulary words.
4. Analyzing Teaching
It was nice to have the video to look back on and revisit missed opportunities to better
support student learning. Here I will go through those opportunities that stood out to me as
changes I could have made during the Guided Reading session last week or if I deliver the lesson
again.
At 13:00 minutes, I listened to students reading but feedback from Kate was that I didn’t
listen long enough. This was the first time I did that and so it is very helpful to know it should be

for longer. My concern at the time, and the reason I stopped them when I did was because I felt
the student reading aloud to me was too loud but without having talked about it before the
reading session, I didn’t feel I could make that change then because my talking about a new rule
would be more distracting than just a loud reader. But, I felt the students were too loud and
distracting to the other quiet readers. In the future, I would teach the quieter reading skill ahead
of doing the independent, quiet reading. A question that has come to mind as I reflect on this is
whether or not the listening to each child read should be added as an objective in the lesson plan?
Also, is it something I should be meaningfully noting in terms of assessment/grade? If so, how
do I do that?
Watching myself at 15:00 minutes when I was capturing notes about my observations of
each student, I wondered how to turn my notes into a recorded assessment/value?
Feedback I received from Kate is to plan to use partners for discussion as it leads to organic
student discussion rather than teacher led discussion. So, in looking through the video, I feel that
at minute 20:00 when I set the purpose for students to make a prediction on their own after they
read independently, I will set the purpose to talk to his or her elbow partner to predict what’s
next.
In addition, at minute 25:00, I asked Amanda to tell us what she read and she summarized
the whole text. Is it ok to get one student to tell all the story? I have been thinking about it and I
think it’s ok and what I could do is make sure I rotate through who I ask to tell us what he or she
read.
At minute 27:00, we discussed that the big sister is helping her little brother, despite our
conversation about predictions where I modelled predicting I didn’t think they would get along
and some of the students had thought she wouldn’t help him. I recapped what we had done but I

didn’t go back to the strategy and talk about how that prediction was wrong. She’s helping him,
time to go back to the strategy to say that the prediction that was wrong. At minute 27:00, while I
was referring back to our guided reading lesson predictions, if I could do that again, I would
bring back the predictions anchor chart and refer back to make it very clear that we used the
strategy and to solidify in the students’ minds what they strategy is. I would also ask students to
restate how to make a prediction and why/how it helps them with comprehension. This would
better support their learning and would provide an informal assessment that they grasped the
literacy strategy.
Another point where I felt I could better support student learning is at minute 29:00 When
Amanda finds the vocabulary word. I allowed a long time after this point for each student to find
it on their own. Because those that have found it may lose focus while they wait for others to find
it, in future, I think that once one student found the word, I would get him or her to tell us all
what page it is on as a clue and continue with that idea that I don’t want students sitting idle
waiting for one or more students to find it themselves and because it one student was struggling
to find it, I wouldn’t want them to standout as not being able to find it.
As I think about my Guided Reading lesson and consider the many challenges that one or
more students could face that I would need to adjust to, I myself am challenged to know for sure
how to address their needs. In this Guided Reading example, I had the student with an IEP for
vision concerns and difficulty hand writing use a laptop computer for writing. While this was
only a practice, I was happy to see that laptop approach in action and working – the student used
the computer to write her predictions and new vocabulary words.
I received feedback from Kate that I did good prediction modeling but I have been
reflecting on how I might change that for a student with different needs. There are so many

possibilities of what challenges kids in the class could be facing. It could be their hearing, seeing,
behaviour, way of learning, language. I would be fortunate if I had an Educational Assistant to
work with any children requiring special education in the classroom as sometimes what is needed
is more one on one time with someone trained to help. If there are different reading levels in the
class, I have looked online and found examples of text that is written at different levels so that is
an option for delivering guided reading lessons at the instructional levels appropriate for different
students. There is of course a great advantage that technology now offers for helping students
who do not learn in the traditionally-used ways of reading and writing and math. If there are
guidelines from a child’s IEP or 504 for how to approach their learning, those would be helpful
for deciding what accommodations to provide to best support each child’s learning. A simple
example of how to help support learning could be having a child who is hard of hearing sit close
to me and in a place where he or she can see my lips. In the case of modelling predicting, in this
case where the kids are in grade 3 and can read, for a child who is hard of hearing, I could
provide written instructions to the children that they can each follow individually if they want or
I could put it up on the smartboard so they can learn from the text there and have it remain very
visible to refer to throughout the lesson. I could provide all of the instructions that I will provide
in the guided reading lesson in writing so that when I say something (e.g. set a purpose), I can
point to the instructions sheet and the child can follow along in that way.
Category Highly Successful Successful Unsuccessful Missing

(3) (2) (1) (0)
Promoting a Positive Describes where teacher Describes where teacher Discusses issues of Discussion of the
Learning demonstrates responsiveness/ demonstrates responsiveness/ responsiveness/ learning environment is
Environment respect/rapport with students and respect/rapport with students respect/rapport and missing.
challenges students to engage in OR how teacher challenges challenging
learning. Gives specific students to engage in learning. students in a
examples. Gives specific examples. general way. Does
not provide
specific examples.

Engaging Students in Answers only one Discussion of how

Gives detailed explanation of Gives general explanation of
Learning part of the instruction engaged
how instruction engages students how instruction engages
question. students in learning is
in developing literacy strategy students in developing literacy
missing.
and requisite skills. Includes strategy and requisite skills.
detailed explanation of how Includes general explanation of
instruction links students’ prior how instruction links students’
academic learning and personal, prior academic learning and
cultural, and community assets personal, cultural, and
with new learning. Identifies community assets with new
concrete evidence of student learning. Identifies evidence of
learning. student learning.
Deepening Student Explains in detail how teacher Gives general explanation of Answers only one Discussion of
Learning During elicits and builds on student how teacher elicits and builds part of the deepening student
Instruction responses to promote on student responses to question. learning during
thinking/apply the literacy promote thinking/apply the instruction is missing.
strategy using requisite. Explains literacy strategy using requisite.
in detail how the teacher models Gives general explanation of
the literacy strategy and supports how the teacher models the
students in practice/ application. literacy strategy and supports
students in practice/
application.
Analyzing Teaching Gives concrete examples of Makes general comments about Reply does not Analysis of teaching is
changes to instruction. changes to instruction. address both whole missing.
Comments address whole class Comments address whole class class and
and individual students and are and individual students but are individual student
specific in how changes would not specific about how changes needs OR does not
improve instruction. would improve instruction. focus on how
changes would lead
to instructional
improvement.
Writing Quality Responses are well written. Responses are well written. 2-3 Writing quality can Writing quality needs
Spelling and grammar rules are errors in spelling or grammar. be improved. 4-5 attention. More than 5
applied throughout. errors in spelling or errors in spelling or
grammar. grammar.

Artifact #4: Survey Research Assignment.
Rationale
Artifact #4 in this portfolio is a Survey Research Assignment. It reflects my competency for
student-led professional development, taught at Medaille as Action Research. This artifact used a
parent survey to understand how parents would like to receive information and communicate
with their child’s teacher to feel best supported in the home-school connection. This approach
aligns with InTASC Standard 9 g) and n) to understand and know how to use a variety of self-
assessment and problem-solving strategies to analyze and reflect on teaching practice and plan
for adaptations and adjustments and to draw upon research as sources of analysis and reflection
to improve practice. In the InTASC area of Leadership and Collaboration, this artifact also aligns
with 10(d) The teacher works collaboratively with learners and their families to establish mutual
expectations and ongoing communication to support learner development and achievement.
This artifact is also a representation of the presence of technology in the school community.
There are so many apps and electronic options available for engagement with parents and to
improve the educational experience for students. This aligns with ISTE standard 1d) modelling
collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning with others in face-to-face and
virtual environments. In this case, the others are the parents. There are many opportunities to use
technology in the classroom as well and there could be interesting ways to link what students
produce with technology to their parents to support the home-school connection.
While this artifact did not include an aspect of science for the students, the research and
analysis, including graphing and description of results complemented my previous education and
professional background in research and science. This aligns with TEAC/CEAP Claim 1 that
Medaille College graduates know the subject matter in their certification areas. As an elementary

school teacher, knowledge of science and research and an ability to conduct action research for
ongoing professional development I feel will be assets to me as an educator.
this artifact.

9(g) The teacher understands and knows how to use a variety of self-assessment
and problem-solving strategies to analyze and reflect on his/her practice and
to plan for adaptations/adjustments.
9(n) The teacher sees him/herself as a learner, continuously seeking opportunities
to draw upon current education policy and research as sources of analysis and
reflection to improve practice.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration
10(d) The teacher works collaboratively with learners and their families to
establish mutual expectations and ongoing communication to support learner
development and achievement.
Claim 1
Claim 2
pedagogy and Best Teaching Practices.
Claim 3
 NYS Ethics
Principle 3
Educators commit to their own learning in order to develop their practice.
Educators recognize that professional knowledge and development are the
foundations of their practice. They know their subject matter, and they understand
how students learn. Educators respect the reciprocal nature of learning between
educators and students. They engage in a variety of individual and collaborative
learning experiences essential to develop professionally and to promote student
learning. They draw on and contribute to various forms of educational research to
improve their own practice.
 Ontario Ethics
Care

students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional

judgment and empathy in practice.
Trust
The ethical standard of Trust embodies fairness, openness and honesty. Members’
professional relationships with students, colleagues, parents, guardians and the
public are based on trust.
Respect
Intrinsic to the ethical standard of Respect are trust and fair-mindedness.
Members honour human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development.
In their professional practice, they model respect for spiritual and cultural values,
social justice, confidentiality, freedom, democracy and the environment.
Integrity
Honesty, reliability and moral action are embodied in the ethical standard of
Integrity. Continual reflection assists members in exercising integrity in their
professional commitments and responsibilities.
Standard 1d
Model collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning with
students, colleagues, and others in face-to-face and virtual environments

Results Summary
Seventeen elementary school parents answered the survey. To summarize the results, all
parents but two strongly agreed that communication with their child’s teacher helps with
academic achievement. The parents also strongly agreed or agreed that they want to hear about
good news in addition to issues about their child from the teacher. With respect to
communication using technology, most but not all parents want to be reached using tech. When
asked specifically, 29% of parents agreed they do not want to be communicated with using
technology. How to solve this in a classroom setting? This survey supports that a majority of
parents (71%) strongly agree or agree that a teacher should ask parents if they would like to be
contacted using technology or if they would prefer to opt out. Only 6% or 2 parents disagreed
that they should be given the option, and the rest (24%) were neutral.
Some more detail from the parents surveyed allows us to learn some preferences in terms
of communication. Over 80% of parents surveyed said the ability to receive and send immediate
feedback with their child’s teacher and the both technology and more traditional forms of
communication have a place in the communication between parents and teachers. Other
questions resulted in more mixed responses. Over half of the parents felt that the ability to
receive sound and picture updates was not important. 65% of parents feel that convenience of the
communication is important but 35% neither agree nor disagree that convenience is important.
This suggests but does not prove that parents are most concerned with the communication
happening more so that how the communication happens. Finally, the parents surveyed were split
just about in half over a preference for received electronic text communication versus
conversation communication.

Conclusions
Some conclusions that can be drawn from this research are that communication between
teacher and parent is a priority for parents and should be a priority for teachers. Teachers have
multiple options to choose from in terms of a combination of tech and non-tech communication.
There is not one solution that will please all parents but most parents agree they would like to be
given the option to receive communication about their child using technology. Convenience is
important to many but most important is the communication.
Plan of action
Actions that I will take based on the data are that early in the new school year, I will
inform parents of a combination of tech and non-tech communication options available to them
to learn more about their child’s classroom experience to support their child’s learning and
academic achievement. I will make sure the forms of communication are convenient for me and
that they provide both positive updates as well as ways of communicated issues or concerns
about a child.
Plan of improvement in the topic area
This topic area continues to have a number of unresolved questions and so more research
in this area would assist teachers to better understand what would optimize communication
between them and parents of the children in their classroom. In addition, exploration of what can
optimize a communication schedule for teachers (e.g. what balance of tech and more traditional
communication offers the best results in children’s achievement as well as is doable in a
teacher’s busy schedule) would improve available knowledge in this topic area.
Artifact #5: ELED Assessment and Instruction Plan.

Rationale
Artifact #5 is an example of an assessment and recommended instruction plan for a grade 1
student. This in depth project demonstrates my competencies in working directly with an
elementary age student to assess literacy and from that assessment to build an appropriate
instructional plan.
The assessment ranged in focus from an interest survey to concepts of print, letter recognition,
phonemes and early reading. The student was a pleasure to work with, was very interested and it
was rewarding for me to have the chance to consider the student with a sense of care, respect and
integrity as I put together an instructional plan that built upon where he was at based on the
results of the literature assessment.
The assessment techniques and instructional approaches to use for this student built upon the
theories of literary experts such as Donald Bear, Lucy Calkins and Fountas and Pinnell (Pinnell,
G. S., & Fountas, I. C., 2008).
The approach also demonstrated my ability to work with a student toward assessing and working
on mastery of the five pillars of reading, namely phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary,
fluency and comprehension.
this artifact.
Standard #1: Learner Development.
1(e) The teacher understands that each learner’s cognitive, linguistic, social,
emotional, and physical development influences learning and knows how to make
instructional decisions that build on learners’ strengths and needs.
1(f) The teacher identifies readiness for learning, and understands how
development in any one area may affect performance in others.

Standard #2: Learning Differences.

2(c) The teacher designs instruction to build on learners’ prior knowledge and
experiences, allowing learners to accelerate as they demonstrate their
understandings.
2(g) The teacher understands and identifies differences in approaches to learning
and performance and knows how to design instruction that uses each learner’s
strengths to promote growth.
Standard #6: Assessment.
6(e) The teacher engages learners in multiple ways of demonstrating knowledge
and skill as part of the assessment process.
6(k) The teacher understands the range of types and
multiple purposes of assessment and how to design,
adapt, or select appropriate assessments to address
specific learning goals and individual differences, and to
minimize sources of bias.
6(l) The teacher knows how to analyze assessment data
to understand patterns and gaps in learning, to guide
planning and instruction, and to provide meaningful
feedback to all learners.
Standard #7: Planning for Instruction
7(d) The teacher plans for instruction based on formative and summative
assessment data, prior learner knowledge, and learner interest.
7(j) The teacher understands the strengths and needs of individual learners and
how to plan instruction that is responsive to these strengths and needs.
7(k) The teacher knows a range of evidence-based instructional strategies,
resources, and technological tools and how to use them effectively to plan
instruction that meets diverse learning needs.
Standard #8: Instructional Strategies.
8(i) The teacher asks questions to stimulate discussion that serves different
purposes (e.g., probing for learner understanding, helping learners articulate their
ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, and helping learners to
question).
 TEAC/ CAEP Claims
Claim 1
Claim 2
pedagogy and Best
 NYS Ethics
Principal 1 Educators nurture the intellectual, physical, emotional, social, and civic
potential of each student. Educators promote growth in all students through the
integration of intellectual, physical, emotional, social and civic learning. They respect the
inherent dignity and worth of each individual. Educators help students to value their own
identity, learn more about their cultural heritage, and practice social and civic
responsibilities. They help students to reflect on their own learning and connect it to their
life experience. They engage students in activities that encourage diverse approaches and

solutions to issues, while providing a range of ways for students to demonstrate their
abilities and learning. They foster the development of students who can analyze,
synthesize, evaluate and communicate information effectively.
Principal 2 Educators create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for
all. Educators apply their professional knowledge to promote student learning. They
understanding of human development and learning theory. They support a challenging
learning environment. They advocate for necessary resources to teach to higher levels of
learning. They establish and maintain clear standards of behavior and civility. Educators
are role models, displaying the habits of mind and work necessary to develop and apply
knowledge while simultaneously displaying a curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. They
invite students to become active, inquisitive, and discerning individuals who reflect upon
and monitor their own learning.
Principle 5 Educators collaborate with parents and community, building trust and
respecting confidentiality. Educators partner with parents and other members of the
community to enhance school programs and to promote student learning. They also
recognize how cultural and linguistic heritage, gender, family and community shape
experience and learning. Educators respect the private nature of the special knowledge
they have about students and their families and use that knowledge only in the students’
best interests. They advocate for fair opportunity for all children.
 Ontario Ethics (students from Canada)

Care
The ethical standard of Care includes compassion, acceptance, interest and insight for
developing students’ potential. Members express their commitment to
students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment
and empathy in practice.
Respect
honour human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. In their
professional practice, they model respect for spiritual and cultural values, social justice,

Standard 1: Foundational Knowledge

I. Basic Data
a. Student name: Zander (see Appendix A for permission slip)
b. Student grade/ stage of development: Grade 1
c. Type of assessment analyzed:
i. Attitude/Interest Inventory (Barnett’s Bubbles, 2016) – See Appendix B
ii. Concepts of Print – See Appendix C
iii. Letter/Sound Recognition Assessment (Clay, M. M., 2000) – See Appendix D
iv. Phonological/Phonemic Awareness Assessment (Reading Rockets) – See
Appendix E
v. Running Records – See Appendix F
1. The Spring Day – Level aa (Reading A-Z)
a. Benchmark Passage
b. Benchmark Passage Running Record
2. This Plane – Level A (Reading A-Z)
a. Benchmark Passage
b. Benchmark Passage Running Record
c. Benchmark Passage Quick Check
II. Summary of assessment document:

a. Include summary statements for all areas assessed (minimum 2): concepts of
print, phonemic awareness, decoding strategies, high frequency sight word
recognition, phonics, writing, fluency, comprehension & vocabulary
Attitude/Interest Inventory - See Appendix B

Zander chose the “I love it” feeling face in response to half of the Interest Inventory
questions including, 1) How do you feel about getting a book for a present?; 2) How do
you feel when you read out loud at home to your mom and dad?; 3) How do you feel
about spending free time reading at home?; 4) How do you feel about starting a new
book?; 5) How do you feel when you listen to a story? In contrast, he choose the “sad”
feeling face in response to all of the questions about reading at school including, 1) How
do you feel when the teacher asks you questions about what you read?; 2) How do you
feel about reading in school?; 3) How do you feel when it’s reading time in class?; and
4) How do you feel about the stories you read in class? He also responded by circling
the “sad” feeling face to the question, 1) How do you feel about reading instead of
playing?
Concepts of Print – See Appendix C

For Concepts of Print, Zander chose a book from his home library. I handed it to
him spine first and asked him to show me the book’s front, back, title and author. He
hesitated only briefly on the author but was confident about the rest. I asked him to show
me where reading should begin, punctuation at the end of a sentence, a word, a letter,
and to spaces between words. He knew all of these well. He then asked me, “What about

the pictures”. Pictures are an important text feature so I encouraged him by asking him
to tell me more about the pictures. He said, “Pictures tell us what the words say.”
Letter/Sound Recognition Assessment – See Appendix D

In this assessment, Zander was asked to name each capital letter in the alphabet when
I pointed to it in a table of the letters of the alphabet placed out of order. He was then
asked to repeat the process for each lower case letter, and then, when I pointed to the
capital letter, Zander was asked to tell me sound that letter makes. He named 25 of 26
capital letters, 23 of 28 lower case letters, and 27 of 33 letter sounds. The letters that
Zander didn’t recognize were T, w, q, i, d and ‘g’ (he did recognize ‘g’).
Phonological/Phonemic Awareness Assessment – See Appendix E

Zander completed the Rhyming Assessment correctly identifying all of the rhymes by
saying ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to the word pairs read out to him. He completed the Identifying
Initial Sounds section, identifying all of the matching and non-matching initial sounds
correctly. Next was the Blending Words section where he was able to correctly guess
each word that I sounded out. He completed the Phoneme Segmentation where opposite
to the Blending Words he had to break down the words into sounds. In this he correctly
broke down the words ‘pig’, ‘at’, ‘sun’, and ‘pop’ but not ‘bag’. For ‘bag’ he was unsure
and didn’t provide an answer. For the words he broke down correctly, he did not break
out the sounds but more stretched out the vowel sounds. He hesitated at the start of this
section so I repeated the explanation a few times as we went down the list, as a
reminder. Zander completed the Phoneme Manipulation section which he found funny.
He laughed at changing the word’s first letter sound to an ‘m’ sound as he correctly
made the words ‘man’ from ‘ran’, ‘map’ from ‘rap’, ‘mop’ from ‘pop’, ‘men’ from
‘pen’, and ‘mat’ from ‘rat’. Finally, Zander completed the Phoneme Deletion section. In
this he correctly said the sound ‘up’ after I said ‘pup’ and ‘ape’ after I said ‘tape’ by
removing the first sound but did not know how to remove the first sound from the words
‘win’, ‘hand’ and ‘rake’ that start with softer sounds that the ‘p’ and the ‘t’. He did make
a rhyme (‘snake’) when I said ‘rake’.
Running Records -See Appendix F

The first Running Record we did was called The Spring Day. It is level ‘aa’ which is
designed for children aged 4 to 6 years. I pointed to each line in the list on the Running
Record page asking Zander to read it to me. He circled each second word (the first word
in each is ‘The’) and then tried to read it. When I asked him to read the first word ‘The’
and pointed to it, he always knew it. With reminders to look at the pictures for clues
about the words and with his ability to recognize first sounds in the words, Zander read
the words ‘flowers’, ‘mud’, ‘sun’, ‘boots’ (selfcorrected with this word after first saying
‘books’) and ‘swing’. He read the words ‘hat’ as ‘hot’; ‘rain’ as ‘nat’, and ‘tree’ as ‘too’.
The second Running Record assessment was called This Plane. It is level ‘A’ which is
more difficult than level ‘aa’ and designed for children aged 4 to 6 years. I reminded him
to look at the pictures, and I pointed at each line and asked him to try reading it to me.
Zander was able to read the words ‘plane’ in every sentence, he recognized the ‘Th’ first

sound in all of the sentences, and with some help, was able to recognize and read the
word ‘goes’. Zander was guessing words in the sentences based on the pictures. He
consistently substituted the word ‘goes’ with the word ‘is’, substituted the word ‘in’ with
‘gone’, ‘out’ with ‘up’, ‘over’ with ‘fast’ and ‘and goes’ with ‘under’. I guided Zander to
reading through the sentences a second time after I had completed my scoring. He
proceeded to circle the words except “This” in each sentence, counted each row’s
number of words and then in logical steps and using his hands and mental math, Zander
added up the total number of words. Zander was able to answer the multiple choice
comprehension questions on the next page. I read these to him orally.
b. Highlight this child’s strengths and weaknesses in each area: what does the
child know, what is the child not yet demonstrating understanding of?

As we learned in class, literacy is all about feeling. From Zander’s Interest
Inventory he has mixed feelings about reading where the majority of the feelings about
reading at home are highly positive while several of those at school are not. This may be
because of language. His school is mostly French language based while his language at
home is English and so he may not understand the content at school as much as he does
at home, making it harder to enjoy it. He may or may not get to choose the books he or
the teacher reads at school as much as at home. It could be related to how the books or
reading are presented for him by the teacher. It may be because of interactions between
him and peers related to reading. At school, he may be asked to try things that he finds
challenging and does not like to do or perhaps asked to do them at times when he would
prefer to be doing something else. My questioning about interest did not go in depth
enough to have any sure answers about these items. These are simply inferences.

For Concepts of Print, Zander has high awareness of the book’s parts and went
beyond this assessment to suggest other text features – the pictures! He went further by
telling me that pictures tell us what the words say which is an important skill to
decoding words at the early stage of reading that he is in as well as is an important skill
to use to help with comprehension. His strong knowledge of concepts of print indicate
what he is looking at when he looks at a book. interest in books, which supports what
was observed in the Interest Inventory conducted at the start of my meeting time with
him.
Letter/Sound Recognition Assessment – See Appendix D

In the Letter Identification Assessment, Zander correctly identified most of the
letters of the alphabet in upper and lower case and most of the sounds of the letters of
the alphabet in upper case. I noticed Zander, 1) incorrectly named ‘T’ as ‘R’, ‘w’ as ‘u’,
‘i’ as ‘l’, and the fancy ‘g’ as ‘u’; 2) did not say the correct letter name or sound for ‘T’,
‘i’ and ‘d’ but recognized their sounds in reading Running Records later; 3) knew the
letter names for ‘Y’ and ‘N; but said ‘W’ and ‘R’ for their sounds, and knew the letter

name for ‘C’ but did not know its ‘s’ sound; and, lastly 4) reversed ‘q’ and ‘d’ calling
them ‘p’ and ‘b’.

Zander’s strengths in this area of the assessment were rhyming, identifying initial
sounds, blending words, and phonemic manipulation. He understood all of these very
well. He is showing partial demonstration of phoneme segmentation and with practice
on how to break up the word sounds, this activity would likely progress very quickly. I
think this was the first time Zander had done an activity like this and so there was a
learning curve and only time for a brief explanation because of working through several
assessments and wanting to respect his ageappropriate attention span. Zander did not yet
show demonstration of phoneme deletion with words that have a “softer” first sound
(e.g. win, hand, rake) compared to a “harder” (e.g. pup, tape).

Zander’s strengths in the Reading Records are his attention to the individual words in
the sentence that he showed by circling each. He is also able to read words’ first sounds
and decode words using the first sounds and the picture if he is reminded to look at the
pictures.
III. Instruction Plan:
a. Discuss instructional needs based on assessment. Instruction should reflect best
practices. Describe explicit instruction and modeling as well as opportunities
for guided and independent practice.

We know it is important to keep recreational reading interest high, particularly from
kindergarten through grade 3 where important developments in reading are often made.
It will be important to work with Zander in the school classroom to help him find books
that are of interest to him, to help him to understand the books so he is interested in
them, and to plan to conference with him one on one to talk about what a book was
about so as to not put him on the spot by asking questions about the reading.

The strong awareness Zander has for concepts of print indicates that explicit teacher
modelling is very important because he has awareness of words and text. Marie Clay
(Clay, 2000) describes that this modelling can happen in a variety of ways ranging from
reading a classroom chart to the students and clearly showing the movement across the
page from left to right, to writer’s workshops to focus on where to start writing on a
page or leaving spaces between words. This approach will reinforce the knowledge
Zander already has and progress his ability to read.
Zander is at the stage where he is discovering how print works and beginning to
understand how letters can come together to represent sounds in words. This could

include focus on teaching that words have starts and ends, sounds in the middle, are
separated by a space, recognition of high frequency words.
Knowledge of Zander’s concepts of print can be combined with knowledge from the
other assessments to develop a strategy for guided instruction and practice (Clay, 2000)
Letter/Sound Recognition Assessment– See Appendix D

As per the handout called “Letter Identification Assessment” received in class,
teaching to work on letter/sound recognition should use the child’s preferred mode of
identifying letters. From this assessment, I think that would be naming them because
Zander named a large majority of the letters correctly. Further, it would be a good
approach to work through the list of letters that were answered for name and/or sound
incorrectly one at a time. When one is mastered, then move on to the next letter. In the
case of the reversed letters ‘q’ and ‘d’, I recently saw a worksheet that looks like a good
one for working through these subtle differences (see Appendix G). I would
recommend this approach to helping him with remembering which way these similar-
looking letters go.

One area to work on to improve Zander’s readiness for reading is Phoneme
Segmentation. For this, I would prepare a mini guided lesson for Zander and work
through the exercise in Appendix H verbally together, guided for some of the examples,
and then asking Zander to complete some on his own to assess understanding. This will
be an activity that we could continue to practice as a class orally when we talk about
various topics.
Another area to work on is Phoneme Deletion. This focuses on teaching the child that
by adding or removing a sound, you can make new words and this helps the child to
understand that words are made up of smaller units of sound that can be changed
(Phoneme Deletion and Addition Activities). I suspect this was the first time he did this
activity and so with guided instruction in a mini-lesson (see exercises in Appendix I)
and independent practice on deleting the first sounds of words, he would likely progress
well in this activity. Practice should be done words with first letter sounds to start and
then move to ending sounds.

Based on the Running Records, Zander is eagerly entering the Initial Reading and
Decoding stage of reading development where he is learning relation between letters and
sounds and between printed and spoken words, and is approaching being able to read
simple text containing high frequency words and phonically regular words and sound
out new one syllable words (Chall, 1983). In order for this stage to continue to develop,
according to Chall (1983), instruction for Zander should target in letter-sound relations
(phonics) and practice in their use. Chall (1983) also recommends encouraging Zander
to read simple stories that contain words with the same phonic elements he has been
taught as well as high frequency words. Zander will benefit from being read to at a level

that is above his independent reading level as it will continue to develop his language
patterns, vocabulary and concepts (Chall, 1983).
IV. Reflection:
a. Write a summary of your experience with this assignment and what you learned
about the process.
My experience with this assignment has been a positive one, over all. I found the
planning stage to be the most difficult. That is because I have not done this before,
because there are many assessments to select from in order to plan and because I was
not sure what to expect with the child I was assessing. I found the process of analyzing
each assessment in depth and then working to develop instruction from what I learned in
the assessment to be a very interesting process. I had the parents of the child in mind
most of the time. I wanted to be writing something that would be useful for them to
understand where their son is at and how they can support his development in addition
to what I would be doing in the classroom.
Because this activity ends at the development of the instructional plan, it leaves me
eager to want to try the instruction I have proposed to better understand if it works, how
I would actually teach it, how the child would react, to think about how I would make
these foci for this child amid a classroom of other students, and where it would lead me
in terms of the child’s progress and need for ongoing improvements to my instruction
approach based on how it all goes.
Some more specific reflections I had as I worked through this assignment are the
following:
In the Interest Inventory, I asked the child to provide a book to me so that he would
be excited about sharing it with me. I recognize this was not as recommended in the
Concepts About Print approach of Marie Clay (Clay, 2000) where familiarity with the
book by the teacher is suggested.
I do not think the newness of the book negatively affected my experience.
In the Letter Identification Assessment, I realize that I did not ask Zander to say the
name of the letter and then say its sound, I only asked him to say the sound the letter
makes. I expect that he would have got more of the letter sounds correct if he had said
the letter first because it would have given him more connection to the names of the
letters that often contain similarities to their sound, and I think he would have identified
more of the letter sounds correctly.
After the Running Records, I found myself reflecting on how and to what level to
guide a student when they don’t know how to read several words in a Running Record.
What I chose to do was to go back through the second Running Record sentences after
my scoring was complete. I read the first two sentences and then he read through the
sentence “The plane goes in.” He noticed and commented on the opposites in the “in”
and “out” and “up” and “down”, which was a good demonstration of his comprehension
of the text once I read some of it for him. Also on the second time through, after scoring
and after I read the first two sentences, Zander read the last sentence “This plane goes
and goes.” on his own. This is an area I would like to understand better - is the Running
Record meant to be a teaching opportunity as well as an assessment?
In closing, Zander was very cooperative and helpful and was excited to work with me
when I came back the second day. I enjoyed this assessment process and look forward to
doing it again as well as having the chance to see it through to implementing the

instruction proposed, reflecting on that, and improving my ability to teach a child to

read!
References
Barnett’s Bubbles. (n.d.). Primary and elementary reading survey and strategies for
reluctant readers. Retrieved November 21, 2017. doi:
www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Primary-and-Elementary-Reading-
Survey-andStrategies-for-Reluctant-Readers-2415815.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Clay, M. M. (2000). Concepts about print: What have children learned about printed language?
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Reading A-Z (n.d.). Benchmark passages & running records. Retrieved November 21,
2017. doi: https://www.readinga-z.com/assessments/benchmark-passages/.
Reading by Phonics (n.d.) Phoneme deletion and addition activities. Retrieved
November 21,
2017. doi: www.readingbyphonics.com/worksheets/phoneme-addition-
deletion3.html#.WhWkPDOGPIU.
Reading Rockets (n.d.). Phonological/phonetic awareness assessment. Retrieved
November 21, 2017. doi:
www.readingrockets.org/teachers/firstyear/fyt_program/modules/assessment/ass
essmentpractice.

Artifact #6: Annotated Bibliography Assignment.
Rationale
The sixth artifact is included in this portfolio because of its focus on English Language
Learners (ELL) and how to optimally approach literacy instruction. The assignment led me to
read and analyze a peer-reviewed journal article about research conducted in a classroom setting
where some students were learning English as a second language to Urdu or Punjabi (Naqvi, R.,
Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., and McKeough, A., 2013).
The topic of the research is letter and phoneme recognition as well as comprehension by ELL
students compared to same-age peers in their class. This level of literacy is foundational for all
future reading and writing and therefore aligns with the International Literacy Association
Standard 1: Foundational Knowledge. It also aligns with Standard 2: Curriculum and Instruction
and Standard 4: Diversity.
This project brought me better understanding of the complexities that go with planning and
implementing instruction in a diversified classroom in which students will be learning English as
a second language. I appreciated the approach the researchers took as it reflects a caring and
respectful approach, aligning with the ethics standards in both Ontario and New York State.
The research involved finding members of the community who could speak Punjabi or Urdu
and locating books at the curriculum level for the classroom that were available in both
Punjabi/Urdu an in English so they could read the same story, one page at a time but alternating
between the two languages. The approach did improve literacy for the ELL students. This
supports a constructivist approach to learning where the students were able to learn more about
English literature when it was placed in comparison to the language they already knew.

this artifact.
2(i) The teacher knows about second language acquisition processes and knows
how to incorporate instructional strategies and resources to support language
acquisition.
2(j) The teacher understands that learners bring assets for learning based on their
individual experiences, abilities, talents, prior learning, and peer and social group
interactions, as well as language, culture, family, and community values.
2(k) The teacher knows how to access information about the values of diverse
cultures and communities and how to incorporate learners’ experiences, cultures,
and community resources into instruction.
9(c) Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, the teacher uses a variety
of data (e.g., systematic observation, information about learners, research) to
evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and to adapt planning and
practice.
10(h) The teacher uses and generates meaningful research on education issues and
policies.
Claim 3
 NYS Ethics
Principle 3
Respect
honor human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. In their
professional
practice, they model respect for spiritual and cultural values, social justice,


Standard 1: Foundational Knowledge
 CEC (for special needs and accommodations)
Principle 5
Developing relationships with families based on mutual respect and actively
involving families and individuals with exceptionalities in educational decision
making.
Principle 6
Using evidence, instructional data, research, and professional knowledge to
inform practice.

Annotated Bibliography
Article Reference
Naqvi, R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., & McKeough, A. (2013). Reading
Dual Language Books: Improving Early Literacy Skills in Linguistically Diverse
Classrooms. Journal Of Early Childhood Research, 11(1), 3-15.
Objective/Purpose
Researchers in Calgary, Alberta (Naqvi, R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D.
W., & McKeough, A., 2013) conducted research with two goals in mind. First, they aimed to
know if early reading skills of children who were read to using dual language books would be
different to children who were read to in English only. The latter were the control group. This
group’s second purpose was to see if the early reading skills differed among English, Punjabi,
and Urdu speaking children who received the dual language reading instruction. The authors
added their intent was to investigate if dual language book reading may have more of an impact
on early reading skills for children who speak the dual language at home than for children who
do not.
Target Population/Participant Number
This study by Naqvi et al. (Naqvi, R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., &
McKeough, A., 2013) studied 105 children who were all 5 years old (mean age) at the start of the
study. The kids were from four schools all located within 3 or 4 kilometers of each other. In each
school, two kindergarten classes participated. One class in each school served as part of the
treatment group and one as the control group. In total, there were 45 students in the control group
(27 boys, 18 girls) and 60 students in the treatment group (32 boys, 28 girls). The schools were
located in an urban, high immigrant neighbourhood. The mother tongues of the participants were
29% English, 36% Punjabi, 16% Urdu and 19% other, in the control group; and 40% English,
27% Punjabi, 17% Urdu, and 16% Other, in the treatment group.
Research Method
In this study (Naqvi, R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., & McKeough, A.,
2013), the researchers used quantitative methods to complement previous qualitative research.
The project was a two-year longitudinal study.
The primary language of the intervention was English and the second languages read
concurrently with English were either French, Urdu, or Punjabi.
In order to prepare for the study, researchers found volunteer readers in the non-English
languages from the school community and trained them on how to deliver readings. They also
completed all of the required permissions for working with the children.
Evaluation of early reading skills of the students was accomplished using Test of Early
Reading Ability, 3rd edition (TERA-3; Reid, D.K. Hresko, W.P., and Hammill, 2001). This
evaluation was completed on all of the children, over a two-week period near the start of the
school year in order to establish a baseline. The areas of literacy tested by TERA-3 (Reid, D.K.
Hresko, W.P., and Hammill, 2001) are alphabet, conventions, and meaning. The students were
read 11 books over the course of 11 weeks. They were read each book three times in one week,
and one book per week. The kids were engaged during the readings (e.g. encouraged to ask
questions and think about what was happening in the book). The control group was read to only
in English. The treatment group was read to in English and a second language (French, Urdu or
Punjabi) concurrently (page by page). Regular literacy study continued in the classroom as well.
Following these 11 weeks, the TERA-3 (Reid, D.K. Hresko, W.P., and Hammill, 2001) test was
repeated on all of the children.

Article Summary
This article describes reserach (Naqvi, R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W.,
& McKeough, A., 2013) that investigated the efficacy of using dual language books as
instructional materials to promote early literacy skills in linguistically and ethnically diverse
young children. While the article only reports results from the first of a two-year longitudinal
study, the main finding reported was that children who spoke Urdu or Punjabi gained
significantly more graphonemic knowledge and knowledge of printed letters and words (as tested
using the alphabet subtest of the TERA-3 (Reid, D.K. Hresko, W.P., & Hammill, 2001)) when
read to using dual language books in those languages than did their peers who were read the
same books in English only.
This research did not show that reading dual language books improved early literacy for non-
Urdu and non-Punjabi children. It did not delay them, however.
Results/Outcomes
Results of the statistical analyses conducted on the data obtained in Naqvi’s research (Naqvi,
R., Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., & McKeough, A., 2013) indicated that the
group read to in both languages experienced significantly greater change on the TERA-3 (Reid,
D.K. Hresko, W.P., and Hammill, 2001) alphabet subtest than did the group read to only in
English. This meant improved recognition and knowledge of printed letters and words. There
were no significant changes between dual language read group and the English language read
group for conventions or meaning subtests. Of note is that language book reading did not
negatively impact students’ knowledge of the conventions of meaning of print.
Looking more closely at the Urdu and Punjabi (UP) children compared to the non-UP group,
analysis revealed a significant improvement in the alphabet scores in the dual-language read
group among the UP children and not the non-UP children, indicating that this intervention
would be best for the English second language learners.
Some key limitations were noted. These included a small sample size; no French speaking
children enrolled in the study despite an interest in early literacy learning within that group;
difficulty by the second language readers because translations did not capture the same sense as
the English versions of the story; there was no extension component added to the reading (i.e.
independent reading of the text, writing about the book, art expression following the reading);
and finally, that the TERA-3 (Reid, D.K. Hresko, W.P., and Hammill, 2001) testing used did not
measure the content of the 11 stories read.
Despite the limitations of this research, it is exploring an interesting area of classroom
experience which is the need to teach language and literacy in a language that is different than
what is being spoken and learned at home. As the authors of this study stated ((Naqvi, R.,
Thorne, K. J., Pfitscher, C. M., Nordstokke, D. W., & McKeough, A., 2013), there is a need to
look at whether or not the gains in early literacy seen in this research would be maintained long
term. It would also be interesting to see this work done with English-speaking children learning
French.
Classroom Application
This article is important to the field of education in Canada and the US because teachers are
faced with teaching students from various language backgrounds and this research looks at a
technique for improving early literacy skills in people who speak either Urdu or Punjabi at home.
Because my goal is to teach French as a second language to elementary school kids, this article is
also important because it explores the reality of how to advance knowledge in a new language in
a classroom. I could apply the knowledge that reading two languages concurrently to children
learning the second language improves their alphabet skills (recognition of letters or strings of
letters and the sounds that they make) in a French second language classroom. I could also apply
it more individually if there is a small group of kids who have immigrated from a country such as
India where their language at home is neither English nor French. I could seek to engage
someone fluent in that language from the school community to assist me.
Artifact #7: Child Abuse Certificate.
Rationale
This artifact represents one example of ongoing professional development through an online
certification in Child Abuse. Others obtained also through a virtual interface have included ones
about violence and cyber safety, for example. Artifact #7 Child Abuse Certificate is important to
include to demonstrate my competencies in accessing new knowledge to continue to grow as a
professional educator. The topic of child abuse specifically is an example of one that can be a
very difficult topic, is a reflection of the child’s home environment and is one that can
significantly affect a child’s ability to learn.
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs supports that people, children included, need to feel safe before
they can begin to learn. Through this online course, I learned some of the signs to recognize in a
child abuse case, my responsibilities to report them, and my challenge to work caringly with a
child facing these realities in order to gain their trust and help them to feel as safe as possible in
the school environment. The routine of a school and classroom can support a child in feeling
more safe. Only when a child feels safe, will he or she be ready to learn.
this artifact.
Standard 9
9(j) The teacher understands laws related to learners’ rights and teacher
responsibilities (e.g., for educational equity, appropriate education for learners with
disabilities, confidentiality, privacy, appropriate treatment of learners, reporting in
situations related to possible child abuse).
Claim 3
Medaille College graduates are caring educators;
 NYS Ethics
Principle 2
Educators create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for all.
Educators apply their professional knowledge to promote student learning. They
understanding of human development and learning theory. They support a
challenging learning environment. They advocate for necessary resources to teach
to higher levels of learning. They establish and maintain clear standards of
behavior and civility. Educators are role models, displaying the habits of mind and
work necessary to develop and apply knowledge while simultaneously displaying
a curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. They invite students to become active,
inquisitive, and discerning individuals who reflect upon and monitor their own
learning.
Care
Compassion, acceptance, interest and insight for developing students' potential.
Members express their commitment to students' well-being and learning through
positive influence, professional judgment and empathy in practice.
Respect
Advocates trust and fair-mindedness. Members honor human dignity, emotional
wellness and cognitive development. In their professional practice, they model
respect for spiritual and cultural values, social justice, confidentiality, freedom,
democracy and the environment
Trust
Embodies fairness, openness and honesty. Members' professional relationships with
students, colleagues, parents, guardians and the public are based on trust
Integrity
Honesty, reliability and moral action are embodied in the ethical standard of Integrity.
Principle 1
d) Model collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning with
students, colleagues, and others in face-to-face and virtual environments;
 CEC (for special needs and accommodations)
Principle 12
Participating in the growth and dissemination of professional knowledge and
skills
Artifact #8: Fieldwork/Participation Reflection – MSED ELED 504
Rationale
The experience of participating in 100 hours of fieldwork in classrooms, observing a teacher
or acting in a teaching capacity, helped me to develop competencies in how to plan, instruct and
assess students. It also allowed me to see the varied dispositions of children in the classrooms
and those of the teachers and staff in the schools.
This was an excellent experience for me to observe best practices in use. As explained by
Marzano, I could see the impact of a routine being set in the classroom. In the grade 1 class I
observed, it was clear this had been practiced very diligently and it allowed a diverse level of
abilities among the students to feel included and supported in their learning.
this artifact.
9(l) The teacher takes responsibility for student learning and uses ongoing
analysis and reflection to improve planning and practice.
10(b) The teacher works with other school professionals to plan and jointly
facilitate learning on how to meet diverse needs of learners.
10(n) The teacher knows how to work with other adults and has developed skills
in collaborative interaction appropriate for both face-to-face and virtual contexts.
Claim 2
pedagogy and Best Teaching Practices.
 NYS Ethics
Principle 3
Principle 4
Educators collaborate with colleagues and other professionals in the interest of
their students learning.
 Ontario Ethics
Integrity
Honesty, reliability and moral action are embodied in the ethical standard of
Integrity.
Measurement & Data CCSS 5.MD.C.
Geometric measurement: understand concepts of volume and relate volume to
multiplication and to addition.
CCSS 5.MD.4 Measure volumes by counting unit cubes, using cubic cm, cubic in,
cubic ft, and improvised units.
CCSS 5.MD.5.b. Apply the formulas V = l × w × h and V = b × h for rectangular
prisms to find volumes of right rectangular prisms with wholenumber edge
lengths in the context of solving real world and mathematical problems
Grade 5 – Measurement
Determine the relationships among units and measurable attributes, including the
area of a rectangle and the volume of a rectangular prism – determine, through
investigation using stacked congruent rectangular layers of concrete materials, the
relationship between the height, the area of the base, and the volume of a rectangular
prism, and generalize to develop the formula (i.e., Volume = area of base x height)
(Sample problem: Create a variety of rectangular prisms using connecting cubes. For
each rectangular prism, record the area of the base, the height, and the volume on a
chart. Identify relationships.);
 CEC ((CEC), 2018)
Principle 1
Maintaining challenging expectations for individuals with exceptionalities to
develop the highest possible learning outcomes and quality of life potential in
ways that respect their dignity, culture, language, and background.
Fieldwork/Participation Reflection – MSED ELED 504
November 17, 2017
In the fall of 2017, I gained one hundred fieldwork hours with kids ranging from grade 1 to
grade 6. Ninety of those hours were with kids in grades 1, 3 and 5 in a small urban setting in
Ontario (City has approximately 120,000 people).
1. Best Practice Focus
In the after-school care program, I have faced challenge with the best practice of treating
the children equally when faced with a case of teasing. I reflect on Nelson, Martella and Galand
who advise to keep personal emotions out of the mix. I realize, that this will be an ongoing
reality in the classroom and one I will need to always be mindful of my thoughts and behaviors
in reaction to children’s behavior as per Langer and colleagues.
In the grade 1 class where I spent 43 hours, I noticed the use of a repeated routine daily that
the teacher must have spent time teaching the students because it is very well executed and they
love it. I noticed how much they enjoy moving through the morning routine. It is always the
same but within it there are changes to which student will have a leadership role which they love
and to what the content will be (e.g. new letter ‘sound’ each week that gets matched with their
vowels learning in the form of an ‘opera’ where they eagerly stand in a line in front of the vowels
anchor chart and sing the sounds while the lead student for the day helps the teacher to guide the
students through the list of vowels’. The always do the opera after the calendar, which they do
after a class move-and-stretch and a toss the ball word game. They always do the opera before a
numbers game that works on quick recognition of numbers from 1 to 24. Interestingly, there is a
student with Down’s Syndrome in the class and she would accompany the lead student daily and
be part of the classroom routine in that way that matches her need for movement and being
included. She is given much respect and encouragement by the teacher and the other students.
This best practice of using a daily routine and taking the time to set it routine is something I saw
the value of because of how it engaged the students (they were proud to know what to expect and
to know how to perform what was expected of them), and how it allowed for learning of
knowledge to happen without having to worry about also teaching a new routine. It was a very
important base that I intend to use.
In the grade 5 class where I spent 35 hours, I saw use of a best practice of collaborating with
a colleague. The grade 5 teacher I observed and the other grade 5 teacher whose classroom was
next door, would talk before the day started, as they prepared their daily messages on the board,
walking into each other’s class and talking about how the students had reacted to a lesson they
had planned together but delivered individually. They then talked about how to adjust it and what
the general level of knowledge and need was in each of their classrooms. An example of this was
an assessment they planned to know if the students in the class knew how to calculate the
perimeter and the area of a rectangle. I was able to look up the standard to know it was
something in the grade 4 curriculum and the intent is that it would be used in more depth at the
grade 5 level. The teacher in the class I observed called the students to sit on the carpet at the
board where she had written a word problem. She walked them through the word problem and
then split them into groups of 4 or 5 students (there were 30 students in the class), gave them
rulers and large graph paper and asked them to work together to figure out the problem. As a side
note, I observed in this classroom that the focus for math is very much on encouraging thinking
and using strategies that make sense to you and not on a right or wrong answer. I stayed with one
table while they worked through it and observed very different levels of math concept and
strategy knowledge for how to solve the problem. One solved it by drawing on the graph paper.
Another did a long-repeated addition in place of a multiplication. In the end, it was clear that,
while some of the students in both classes were able to solve the math problem, they did not do
so using the formulas and so the next day, the teachers planned a lesson to teach the formulas to
be able to work into the grade 5 curriculum.
In the grade 6 class, I observed the best practice of offering the students encouragement and
positive feedback while the students were being taught. This is important to allow the students to
feel valued and remain engaged. It is also important to remember that some students may not like
to receive public praise. It was clear that the teachers knew all of the students and were in tune
with how to speak to each of them, some more publicly than others, to encourage them to
continue their thinking processes and engagement in the discussion.
In the “scouts”-like program that I lead in place of the usual leader, it really felt like I was
teaching in a class – except there were more parents around to watch, and to help at the stations.
I used the best practice of engaging students in smaller groups to create a more personalized and
interesting session, as well as to keep them moving so they wouldn’t get bored. I tried to follow
their program’s usual routine to start the session as a best practice. This is where they come in a
circle and welcome each other.
2. Settings
In the after-school program that I have been involved with for over two school years where
I take care of three children that are not my own for an hour and a half one day a week from 3:30
to 5:00 pm. This fall semester, the two boys are in grade 1 and the girl is in grade 3. This group
is not diverse. My role in their care starts with getting them off the bus at 8:25 and walking them
to my home.
In the grade 1 class, there were 20 students – 9 girls and 11 boys aged 5 or 6 years old. There
was some diversity in the ethnicity and backgrounds of the students but all were culturally very
much Canadian. There were a few children from lower socio-economic status or living with a
single parent but for the most part, the class was made up of children from middle-class homes
with two parents in the home. There was one child with down’s syndrome, one child who was an
English Language Learner, and one child who has not been diagnosed with a disability but shows
signs of anxiety and attention deficit disorder. There was a Teaching Assistant in the class for 5
hours in the day to work closely with the child with down’s syndrome and the classroom teacher
has her on her own with the rest of the class for two hours of the day. In both this classroom and
the grade 5 classroom I observed, the setup did not have desks in rows but tables to facilitate
breaking into small group work. In each of the classes, the students had an assigned seat.
In the grade 5 class, there was flexibility to choose where you would sit unless directed
specifically by the teacher to go to ‘home base’. This also included some places with pillows
near the window or under the table. There was a larger comfortable chair that two students could
sit in. There was a café table in the corner with two chairs at it. This approach could be related to
the Classroom Organization and Management Program (COMP) focused on classroom
organization and making students accountable for choice of work space because they are still
expected to do the work but are being given the freedom to choose where they would like to sot.
In the grade 1 class, the students always worked at their ‘home base’ assigned seat at the same
table.
The grade 5 class was made up of students with broader ethnic diversity than the grade 1
class and there were some students from each of low, middle and high socio-economic status in
the class. There were no ELL students. There were six students with an IEP in the class. The
teacher did not share with me who those students were but I was able to see some
accommodations in place including use of chrome-books for writing, use of a fold up “desk
block” to allow students to have a private space at the group table and therefore see less
distractions, a modification for one student to respond orally for the teacher to write down on the
worksheet, and the teacher sometimes sitting down with or calling asking one of a few students
to sit with her when it was time to work on something independently so she could help them. I
noticed that she alone cannot get to all of the IEP children who could use one on one support
each time the students were working, but I noticed she did change-up who she would sit with so
that over the course of the week, she had given one-on-one help to the students who needed extra
support.
All of the above classes were located in a small Ontario city, so urban but not a big city.
The grade 6 class I observed was in urban New York. The class was a group of
approximately 15 girls and a group of approximately 8 boys. The boys and girls were taught
separately but taught the same material. They were in a university classroom setting because of
the private nature of the education program taking place on weekends at the University. The
students sat at desks of their choosing in a large class. Often, they were very close to each other
but sometimes there was one student who would distance themselves from the group. There was
some ethnic diversity in the classroom. Something all of the students had in common was they
are low socio-economic status.
The “scouts” program is scouts-guides-brownies-inspired community-led program for 15-
20 kids each year that is called Passports. The name comes from the passport booklet that each
child has in his or her homemade and self-decorated satchel. It is where each child gets a sticker
at the end of the session. The one that I had the chance to lead took place in the program room of
a local public library. This program runs approximately once monthly for a couple of hours on a
Sunday afternoon. The intent of the program is to get kids outside and learning about nature but
also drawing on the skills and knowledge of adults in the community who can volunteer to lead a
session. For example, a parent led a sewing session when the children decorated their own
passport satchel. Other than sewing indoors in a community church, the program usually runs at
the Outdoor School site, outside. Parents regularly participate. The children are all in grade 1.
There not a lot of ethnic diversity. All of the families are middle socio-economic status. Nine
children were in attendance for the session that I taught.
3. Description
The after-school program children have an interesting dynamic. They know each other very
well and so their respect for each other is sometimes not what it should be. In September, when
the grade 3 girl teased the grade 1 boy that is not her brother, it was interesting to see the grade 1
boy who is her brother come to her defense and experiencing that while it is a best practice to
treat all students equally, it was difficult to navigate how to do that in that moment. After some
reflection, I made some changes for the following week’s after school program. These changes
included being mindful of the fact that in the moments right off the bus, the kids are hungry and
tired after a day of school. This meant that, while I know each can individually be trusted to run
ahead of me on the sidewalk that I needed to stay close to which ever child was at the front
because where the teasing occurring was at the corner where the kids waited for me to arrive.
This worked and has continued to work since that day. In addition, with Maslow’s hierarchy of
needs in mind, I made sure that the first things the students did upon arrival at the house was
wash their hands and sit at the counter for snack. There are often hurt feelings about who can sit
beside who but we are working on that acceptance of turns on an ongoing basis. What we did last
year after snack is read a book to give everyone some quiet time. Because the age gap this year
from grade 3 to grade 1 seems to be more impactful than with the same students last year (grade
2 to kindergarten), getting their group interest in a story can be difficult to achieve. So, what I
have done instead is ensure I have a science experiment planned to do with them after snack or I
read a book sitting close to where they are playing and any who want to come over, do. This
approach has involved me purposely focusing on ‘withitness’ as Brophy and Kounin have each
described, and ‘clarity of communication’. These are two other best practices for teachers and
they have allowed the kids and I working together to prevent major conflicts and create an
environment where the children are more aware what is expected for their behavior.
In the grade 1 class, I had a chance to observe an ELL student. He was new to the school this
year in September. He was attentive to the classroom routines and it wasn’t until he was called
upon to do something individually that it became obvious to me that he was not understanding
everything she was saying. Because he was able to understand “hidden curriculum” of non-
verbal cues, he can follow the class routine and knows when he needs to do work but he does not
understand conversation one on one. Therefore, to support her messages to him and explain what
he needs to know to do, over the course of the time I was in the class, the teacher would speak
more slowly and clearly to him, she would repeat herself, she used very deliberate hand actions.
In some cases, she assigned another student to help make sure he got the materials that he needed
for the work they were doing. There were visuals including words accompanied by images, a
picture dictionary and numbers hung around the classroom for all of the students and with those,
he was also able to do the daily journal writing that the students did in the class when instructed
to by the teacher.
Also in the grade 1 class, I observed the students’ school day was broken up by movement
between activities because of the layout of the class and the teacher’s energy and adding a group
stretch when she felt the need. I think this is a nice way to keep the kids from getting bored and
physically is important for their high energy, growing bodies. This movement starts with the
morning routine described previously where each activity they do, even if only a few feet away
from the previous one, is enough that the students all get up and move over a bit and then sit
down. Or, the ball throwing word game, the opera and the numbers game are done standing up.
After the morning routine, the format used by the grade 1 teacher and the social studies teacher
who comes in some days, is to talk with the kids about what is being learned in the lesson with
the kids sitting on the floor and then they move to their place at their table when it comes time
for their independent work.
In the grade 5 class, I observed a teacher who is trying a flexible seating approach for the
first time this year. As described above, it has “comfortable/relaxed” seating areas students can
choose to sit at to do their work alone or in groups. I asked the teacher about the approach and, as
she is also someone who likes the students to have more physical freedom to make themselves
comfortable and move around, she said she hates desks but is also finding there are challenges
with this approach because the class is very social. She said that when it is time to do work,
because they sit with their friends and are in a group seating arrangement, they get talking and
the room volume gets loud and they don’t focus on their work.
Also in this grade 5 class, I enjoyed an approach to math that the teacher used most
mornings as the class’ first lesson. She called it mental math. It uses Piaget’s approach of
connecting new knowledge to knowledge they already have (Cherry, 2018) and on Gardner’s
thinking of multiple intelligences. She would put a multiplication on the board of two numbers of
two or three digits and asked the students to use a strategy that worked for them. The room was
quiet and the kids were – most of them were – obviously thinking through the math. When they
were ready, they made a sign of a thumbs up on their chest and when most of the students
seemed ready to discuss, she would say, “Who has a possible solution?” and she would get all of
the (or just one) solutions the students had and she would write them on the board. Then she
would say, who can tell me their strategy and she would listen to the student and write out the
strategy they used providing extra explanation or sometimes asking for clarification. In the end,
she would always have at least three strategies on the board with a student’s name beside it.
In the grade 6 class, there was a unique feature of gender separation for the teaching.
Observations were that the teachers approached each gender group with some subtle differences.
For example, with the girls’ class, there was more focus by one teacher on talking to them in a
familiar and friendly tone, to make them feel comfortable and welcome in the classroom and
among their peers. She also included a circle approach that organically lead to a go around the
circle for each student to talk. In contrast, one teacher started the class with a firm tone with the
boys, as though to establish the tone for the class and then she softened with them as the lesson
went on. The students in both classes were very attentive. There were some students that were
more vocal than others.
I also had the opportunity to observe team teaching in the grade 6 class where two different
personalities of teachers taught the class together. The students did not seem to behave or react
any differently than when there was one teacher.
The “scouts” or Passports session that I was fortunate enough to lead was science. It
involved learning the concept of energy moving through a circuit started with a conceptual
approach then as a team building a Snap Circuit. Next, I split the children into three groups of
three and they each travelled to a station where the focus was on observation and inquiry. The
stations were, 1) a mineral deposit experiment to mimic stalagmite and stalactite formation; 2) a
model of a lunar eclipse to help children understand how Aristotle used the Earth’s shadow on
the moon as a clue to confirm the Earth was round and not flat, and finally, 3) a magnet station
that was very tactile where the children could talk about the poles and try to put magnets together
and pick up cut up pieces of pipe cleaner.
4. Analysis (Connections/Links)
The treatment of each student equally and the importance of teacher clarity, as I was
reminded in the after-school program, can be very difficult to practically accomplish. It doesn’t
mean that you do and say the same things to each child. It reminds me of Howard Gardner’s
Theory of Multiple Intelligences because it is important to always do my best to understand how
a child learns and to build a relationship with them in order to treat them as equally – but
individually respectfully - as possible and meet them “where they’re at” as we learned in EDU-
500.
Because of the table set-up in the grade 1 classroom, the kids are able to talk to each other if
they want to say an idea they have out loud before writing it down, for example. It also allows
students, to see what their peers are doing so if they did not fully understand the instructions – as
in the case with the ELL student, they could catch on by watching or asking another student at
their table. This is an example of a collaborative learning setting. The layout of the classroom
allows free movement of the children through it which is also a best practice for ease of children
getting needed materials, in this class going to have a drink at their water bottle near the door or
leaving to go to the bathroom if they need to. It also has a flow for the students when they arrive
in the morning to bring in their agendas and lunchboxes and then move to the carpet area to read
independently. The teacher stands in the hallway in the morning to greet them and as a reminder
of their routine and what to bring into the classroom. After arriving by bus, some of the students
may ask to go to the bathroom too. Once the students are in the classroom, the teacher comes in
and while the students are reading (the teacher redirects any students who haven’t got a book or
may be sharing with another student, to get their own book), the teacher looks through the
agendas to collect homework items and check for notes from parents.
Important for all of the students and a good tool to help the ELL student is the very well-
established routine that was a best practice I saw used in this class. It allows the students, and
particularly the ELL student him to spend his time learning and practicing knowledge and skills
instead of spending time trying to figure out what to do.
I feel an area of competency of mine is to help keep kids moving through the day and engage
with them with my high energy. I knew the importance of routine from what we have learned in
our classes but to see it executed so well and to see the impact it has on the students was very
valuable. It is my goal to make sure that I plan, teach and execute a routine appropriate for the
age and needs to the students in my class that will facilitate greater learning and sense of
inclusion in the classroom I teach.
In the grade 5 class, I would be curious to know if in September, the teacher put a lot of time
into explaining and practicing the routine that would need to go with this classroom setup and if
doing so next year would change how the students act when they get to work at their group
stations. I expect that because it is her first year doing it that she may not have known all of the
routine details that would be needed in order to make the approach work its best but that it will
improve with each year.

In addition, by the mental math and working out the strategies on the board, I felt the
students who didn’t get the right answer would get to a point in their explanation where it would
be coming clear they had miscounted or other and then the teacher would help clarify for the
class. Then she would touch each strategy on the board and ask, who else used this strategy and
those who did would raise a twisting hand to show they had and so on for the rest of the
strategies. I feel like this was an empowering and interesting approach that I would like to try.
Math is a competency of mine but this approach opened my mind to the concept we had learned
in EDL-502 that math needs to be about the strategy and the thinking and not the answer in order
for students to gain confidence about math. It also allows for diverse learning and thinking styles
to choose how they would like to think it through, and finally, it shows other students in the class
different ways of thinking through a math problem.
We read about and discussed in class the importance of providing reinforcement and ongoing
feedback to students. The format of the grade 6 class was that this approach was used. The
teachers were very encouraging to the students and provided praise and feedback when the
students spoke up to participate in the discussion.
In the Passports, I found my greatest challenge was at the start where two of the children, in
particular were being disruptive to the start of the session and would not form a circle to start the
regular routine at the start of class. A best practice coined and first developed by Madeline
Hunter in 1960 of using the anticipatory set would have likely served me well to get the attention
and respect of the students at that time. It was also the case that I was not familiar with the
routine that the children do in the circle at the start and my focus in preparation had been for the
science portion and so I did not gain the attention of the children well even once I got them into a
circle. They were great once we started into the circuit activity and throughout the rest of the
session. They were engaged, interacting with each other and the “host” at each station, although
not interested in listening to a lot of theory. They liked what they could touch and do.
5. Applications
Thinking of how to apply treating students equally and supporting my ability to communicate
in a clear and meaningful way with each student, I would like to use the “True Colors®”
(www.truecolorsintl.com) approach to personal and peer self-discovery that we learned in EDU-
503. This approach allows all students to learn about themselves more and for all of us in the
class to learn more about each other. As I reflect currently, this is something I could try with the
after school program now as well. I am curious to see how it would be received and effective or
not with the grade 1 students. I know our teacher Kim Grant uses it regularly with her grade 3
students.
As far as classroom setup, I am interested in creating a space where students can be
comfortable to choose where they would like to work but I know this will need to go with
dedicated time at the start of the school year to establish and repeat and practice the routines and
expectations that will need to be met to allow this room set up to work well for all of us.
I am very interested in working to develop my ability to capture students’ strategies as they
explain how they thought about a math problem – that’s assuming I can get them to sit quietly
and work through a math problem in the way that I observed �….I’m sure that takes some focus
and planning and conversation with the students as well. I like the idea teaching the students how
to think through more complex math in their heads because this is a good life skill to have!
I have enjoyed having the chance to see what engages students, what gets them thinking and
what they ask questions about. Also, in the science session in particular, I really enjoyed seeing
that once the children felt safe and realized it wasn’t an evaluation, just a place for them to
observe and inquire, they figured out how the science worked in many ways, on their own!
Finally, I will look forward to building a relationship with each of the students in my class so
that I know how to encourage them and reinforce their learning and give them regular feedback
so they know where they are at and their self-confidence in this world continues to build!
Conclusion
The eight artifacts above have varied in their demonstration of key competencies I have
developed to prepare me for teaching. I look forward to the opportunity to put them to use in an
elementary school setting. The approach to learning that I have gained from these artifacts will
allow me to be a caring, respectful teacher with strong foundational knowledge and an
understanding of where to find additional resources, how to create valuable instructional
materials and how to continuously grow and develop as an educator.
The following section will focus on the standards in more depth and how the artifacts come
together to support them.

Section 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MSED ELEMENTARY PORTFOLIO PROJECT 1

Section Three: Teacher Candidate Artifacts

Artifact #1: Author Study SMARTNotebook Presentation …………………...…. 21

Artifact #2: Assessing Student Math Learning ……….……………………….…. 24

Artifact #3: Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson ………………… 92

Artifact #4: Survey Research Assignment………………………….……………. 105

Artifact #5: ELED Assessment and Instruction Plan.……………………...……. 119

Artifact #6: Annotated Bibliography Assignment…….…………………………. 148

Artifact #7: Child Abuse Certificate ……………………………………………... 157

Artifact #8: Fieldwork/Participation Reflection – MSED ELED 504.…………… 160

[Back to Table of Contents]

Artifacts & Rationales

[Back to Table of Contents]

Artifact #1: Author Study SMARTNotebook Presentation.

Artifact #1 is an author study of James Ransome delivered in the format of a

with grade 5 students. The SMARTNotebook is a demonstration of my competency in

practices of differentiated instruction (Tomlinson, C., 1999),

[Back to Table of Contents]

community resources into instruction.

[Back to Table of Contents]

[Back to Table of Contents]

Reading Unfamiliar Words

 ISTE (for technology)

 ILA (for literacy) (International Reading Association, 2010)

 Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) ((CEC), 2018)

[Back to Table of Contents]

Artifact #2: Assessing Student Math Learning.

New York following completion of my studies at Medaille College.

specifically, this artifact demonstrates my competencies in each of planning for instruction,

assessment, learner accommodation, diversity and meeting math curriculum standards in my

real world objects and using improvised units.

deciding if some students would need to be instructed in a different manner.

[Back to Table of Contents]

[Back to Table of Contents]

Standard 1: Learner Development

[Back to Table of Contents]

[Back to Table of Contents]

 Ontario Ethics (students from Canada)

[Back to Table of Contents]

 Ontario Ministry of Education Curriculum Expectations (students from Canada)

[Back to Table of Contents]

Artifact #3: Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson Video.

future instruction of each student.

seeing myself instruct were pivotal in my learning process at Medaille.

[Back to Table of Contents]

aligns with the curriculum standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.3.1.b

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.3.4.a Use sentence-level context as a clue to the meaning of a word or

standards CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.3.3 Describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits,

character traits This could be seen at 3:50 in the video.

Standard 1: Learner Development

[Back to Table of Contents]

[Back to Table of Contents]

[Back to Table of Contents]

Reflection on ‘Predicting’ Guided Reading Lesson Video

engaged and participated in the lesson.

back and will reflect upon it in the following text.

assignment description. These are 1. Promoting a Positive Learning Environment; 2. Engaging

Students in Learning; 3. Deepening Student Learning During Instruction; and 4. Analyzing

1. Promoting a Positive Learning Environment

[Back to Table of Contents]

in creating a learning environment of modelling how to summarize several ideas. An example of

this is at 25:00 to 26:45.

2. Engaging Students in Learning