Standard 3:

Meeting descriptors 3.2 and 2.2, this unit was planned using the Understanding by Design (UbD) approach, which has 3 stages. Evidence 1 – Unit Plan demonstrates that teachers begin Stage 1 of planning by determining the conceptual understandings, transferrable skills, learning goals, and essential questions of the unit. In Stage 2, teachers plan the tasks that will provide evidence for meeting the leaning goals in Stage 1. Stage 3 is the most specific stage where teachers detail each lesson. This is backwards planning approach also aligns with descriptor 3.1 as it ensures lessons are planned after learning goals are set, making the content of the lesson more effective for reaching those goals. Students are also more engaged with their learning process because their goals are front and center. 

The structure of the unit is based around the Talk for Writing (T4W) program and the Oxford Read and Discover books used in our English curriculum. Specifically, regarding descriptor 2.2, the Talk for Writing program provides a structure that can be flexibly applied to academic content. The structure is defined in 3 stages: imitation, innovation, and invention. After introducing the unit and exploring models of opinion writing, I planned six lessons for imitation, two lessons for innovation, and two lessons for invention, as can be seen in Evidence 1. The first stage of this writing program is the longest to allow teachers maximum modeling and scaffolding time before students reach the independent assessment task. The independent assessment task stage is invention. These stages are described in more detail throughout Evidence 2 – T4W Guide.

Finally, in the last stage of planning, the flow and specific activities for each lesson are fleshed out in a Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) presentation. PowerPoint is used for every lesson to support English language learners with visual aids, which also meets descriptor 3.3 and 3.4. This unit has 91 slides and each lesson begins with WALT and WILF goals clearly and explicitly displayed, another practice that meets descriptor 3.1. WALT and WILF are acronyms that stand for “we are learning to” and “what I’m looking for,” respectively. These are shared at the beginning of every class to make the learning goals explicit, and it also establishes a routine the students can become comfortable with. The WALT describes what students should be able to understand and the WILF addresses what the students should be able to do. This can be seen in Evidence 3 – Unit PPT.

Meeting descriptors 3.2 and 2.2, this unit was planned using the Understanding by Design (UbD) approach, which has 3 stages. Evidence 1 – Unit Plan demonstrates that teachers begin Stage 1 of planning by determining the conceptual understandings, transferrable skills, learning goals, and essential questions of the unit. In Stage 2, teachers plan the tasks that will provide evidence for meeting the leaning goals in Stage 1. Stage 3 is the most specific stage where teachers detail each lesson. This is backwards planning approach also aligns with descriptor 3.1 as it ensures lessons are planned after learning goals are set, making the content of the lesson more effective for reaching those goals. Students are also more engaged with their learning process because their goals are front and center. 

The structure of the unit is based around the Talk for Writing (T4W) program and the Oxford Read and Discover books used in our English curriculum. Specifically, regarding descriptor 2.2, the Talk for Writing program provides a structure that can be flexibly applied to academic content. The structure is defined in 3 stages: imitation, innovation, and invention. After introducing the unit and exploring models of opinion writing, I planned six lessons for imitation, two lessons for innovation, and two lessons for invention, as can be seen in Evidence 1. The first stage of this writing program is the longest to allow teachers maximum modeling and scaffolding time before students reach the independent assessment task. The independent assessment task stage is invention. These stages are described in more detail throughout Evidence 2 – T4W Guide.

Finally, in the last stage of planning, the flow and specific activities for each lesson are fleshed out in a Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) presentation. PowerPoint is used for every lesson to support English language learners with visual aids, which also meets descriptor 3.3 and 3.4. This unit has 91 slides and each lesson begins with WALT and WILF goals clearly and explicitly displayed, another practice that meets descriptor 3.1. WALT and WILF are acronyms that stand for “we are learning to” and “what I’m looking for,” respectively. These are shared at the beginning of every class to make the learning goals explicit, and it also establishes a routine the students can become comfortable with. The WALT describes what students should be able to understand and the WILF addresses what the students should be able to do. This can be seen in Evidence 3 – Unit PPT.

In the last stage of planning, the flow and specific activities for each lesson are fleshed out in a Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) presentation. PowerPoint is used for every lesson to support English language learners with visual aids, which also meets descriptor 3.3 and 3.4. This unit has 91 slides and each lesson begins with WALT and WILF goals clearly and explicitly displayed, another practice that meets descriptor 3.1. WALT and WILF are acronyms that stand for “we are learning to” and “what I’m looking for,” respectively. These are shared at the beginning of every class to make the learning goals explicit, and it also establishes a routine the students can become comfortable with. The WALT describes what students should be able to understand and the WILF addresses what the students should be able to do. This can be seen in Evidence 3 – Unit PPT.

Within the PPT and how I deliver it, I use a variety of teaching strategies (descriptor 3.3) to meet the students’ needs. All of the students are second language learners, so many slides contain a visual aid like a picture or a video (descriptor 3.4) to help support their comprehension. When the PPT contains pictures or videos featuring people, I strive to include diversity and expose the students to people of different backgrounds. Videos also help teachers differentiate by interest and get the students more engaged in the content. Instructional slides are broken into smaller, digestible chunks so students are not confronted with a wall of text. I follow up with models and comprehension checks before starting any activity. The Talk for Writing program has modeling and worked examples built into it, which is part of the reason why this program is so effective (descriptor 2.2, 3.6).

Finally, in the last stage of planning, the flow and specific activities for each lesson are fleshed out in a Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) presentation. PowerPoint is used for every lesson to support English language learners with visual aids, which also meets descriptor 3.3 and 3.4. This unit has 91 slides and each lesson begins with WALT and WILF goals clearly and explicitly displayed, another practice that meets descriptor 3.1. WALT and WILF are acronyms that stand for “we are learning to” and “what I’m looking for,” respectively. These are shared at the beginning of every class to make the learning goals explicit, and it also establishes a routine the students can become comfortable with. The WALT describes what students should be able to understand and the WILF addresses what the students should be able to do. This can be seen in Evidence 3 – Unit PPT.

Within the PPT and how I deliver it, I use a variety of teaching strategies (descriptor 3.3) to meet the students’ needs. All of the students are second language learners, so many slides contain a visual aid like a picture or a video (descriptor 3.4) to help support their comprehension. When the PPT contains pictures or videos featuring people, I strive to include diversity and expose the students to people of different backgrounds. Videos also help teachers differentiate by interest and get the students more engaged in the content. Instructional slides are broken into smaller, digestible chunks so students are not confronted with a wall of text. I follow up with models and comprehension checks before starting any activity. The Talk for Writing program has modeling and worked examples built into it, which is part of the reason why this program is so effective (descriptor 2.2, 3.6). 

Google Classroom is another digital resource used in this unit (descriptor 3.4). The gestures and text map for the model text is uploaded to Google Classroom for students to review at home (Evidence 4 – Google Classoom). Posting resources on Google Classroom gives the students agency over their own learning. It also provides an opportunity for parents to support their children and engage in the learning process with them. Through Google Classroom, the teacher can communicate with parents about where their children are in the curriculum and what they are currently working on. When sharing resources on Google Classroom, I always make sure to include that parents or students can contact me with questions. Parents have a variety of methods to do so, including email, by phone, in person, or by Google Meet video chat. This Talk for Writing unit will also be shared with the learning community during the School Festival in February (descriptor 3.7).

Meeting descriptors 3.2 and 2.2, this unit was planned using the Understanding by Design (UbD) approach, which has 3 stages. Evidence 1 – Unit Plan demonstrates that teachers begin Stage 1 of planning by determining the conceptual understandings, transferrable skills, learning goals, and essential questions of the unit. In Stage 2, teachers plan the tasks that will provide evidence for meeting the leaning goals in Stage 1. Stage 3 is the most specific stage where teachers detail each lesson. This is backwards planning approach also aligns with descriptor 3.1 as it ensures lessons are planned after learning goals are set, making the content of the lesson more effective for reaching those goals. Students are also more engaged with their learning process because their goals are front and center. 

The structure of the unit is based around the Talk for Writing (T4W) program and the Oxford Read and Discover books used in our English curriculum. Specifically, regarding descriptor 2.2, the Talk for Writing program provides a structure that can be flexibly applied to academic content. The structure is defined in 3 stages: imitation, innovation, and invention. After introducing the unit and exploring models of opinion writing, I planned six lessons for imitation, two lessons for innovation, and two lessons for invention, as can be seen in Evidence 1. The first stage of this writing program is the longest to allow teachers maximum modeling and scaffolding time before students reach the independent assessment task. The independent assessment task stage is invention. These stages are described in more detail throughout Evidence 2 – T4W Guide.

Finally, in the last stage of planning, the flow and specific activities for each lesson are fleshed out in a Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) presentation. PowerPoint is used for every lesson to support English language learners with visual aids, which also meets descriptor 3.3 and 3.4. This unit has 91 slides and each lesson begins with WALT and WILF goals clearly and explicitly displayed, another practice that meets descriptor 3.1. WALT and WILF are acronyms that stand for “we are learning to” and “what I’m looking for,” respectively. These are shared at the beginning of every class to make the learning goals explicit, and it also establishes a routine the students can become comfortable with. The WALT describes what students should be able to understand and the WILF addresses what the students should be able to do. This can be seen in Evidence 3 – Unit PPT.

Within the PPT and how I deliver it, I use a variety of teaching strategies (descriptor 3.3) to meet the students’ needs. All of the students are second language learners, so many slides contain a visual aid like a picture or a video (descriptor 3.4) to help support their comprehension. When the PPT contains pictures or videos featuring people, I strive to include diversity and expose the students to people of different backgrounds. Videos also help teachers differentiate by interest and get the students more engaged in the content. Instructional slides are broken into smaller, digestible chunks so students are not confronted with a wall of text. I follow up with models and comprehension checks before starting any activity. The Talk for Writing program has modeling and worked examples built into it, which is part of the reason why this program is so effective (descriptor 2.2, 3.6). 

While teaching the unit, I use the level of student engagement to reflect on my teaching strategies. Also, as is practice, the head of the bilingual program will observe my lessons. I use his feedback to reflect on my teaching practice and update the UbD planner with any observations. Additionally, the final assessment learning outcomes are a good indicator of the quality of the teaching. I can see the students’ progress clearly throughout each stage as it is recorded in their English notebooks (descriptor 3.6). This is conveyed in Evidence 5 – Student Notebook.