June 2, 2008
As the day began, we discussed pedagogy and various pedagogical topics including multiple intelligences and assessments.
Then, we discussed the significance of mathematical empirical research articles that we would soon be researching. Next, we
discussed lesson plans and elaborated on the Madelyn Hunter form. We expressed the significance of aligning the lesson being
taught with the objectives and the objectives with the assessment. We went on to discuss the importance of infusing technology
in the classroom and how to differentiate for diverse learners. Later, we analyzed various grade levels of the Mississippi
Mathematics Framework. Lastly, we took a pre-test and reviewed our responses to them.
The instructive discussion that we had on each component of the Madelyn Hunter lesson plan was most beneficial to me.
This discussion helped me to obtain a clearer understanding of this particular format of planning for instruction. Next year,
I will be sure to carefully plan and incorporate each of these components on my lesson plans and in my teaching.
This lesson could be evaluated by allowing individuals to write and model each component while facilitating one of our
TCIM sessions. I will definitely share what I learned with other novice teachers.
June 3, 2008
Today our guest speaker, Dr. Bonita Potter, spoke with us concerning curriculum. I learned a great deal of information
from her presentation. One main factor that Dr. Potter spoke on was motivation. It intrigued me because before a student can
accomplish any task, he or she must first be motivated to do so. To provide this motivation, I was informed by one of my colleagues
in the program to provide many opportunities for students to be successful. We also discussed the relevance of building assessments
Later, we got into pairs and created a lesson plan for a given topic. My partner and I did our lesson on bar graphs. In
doing so, we collaborated, shared ideas and presented our lesson. We each played significant roles in developing and implementing
our lesson. For our assessment, we required of the individual to construct a bar graph on their own, when given the necessary
information to complete the task.
Pairing with another teacher gave me the opportunity to implement more into my lesson. Next year, I plan on providing
that same opportunity for my students. I will allow plenty occasions were my students will take part in cooperative learning.
Like I did today, my students will be able to converse, share ideas, and assist each other while working in groups. I will
express to my colleagues how helpful it was to converse with another colleague and encourage them to do so as well.
June 4, 2008
Today we discussed instructional objectives. In writing these objectives, one should use verbs from the multiple levels
of Bloom's Taxonomy-especially the ones from the higher levels. Also, these objectives should be specific, measurable, short
term, and observable. I learned that these objectives are the foundation for the lesson and assessments. Next, we researched
empirical journal articles in mathematics. Later, we worked on lesson plans and aligned the mathematics standards with our
The lesson on writing instructional objectives helped me to enhance the objectives section of my lesson plans. I was
taught how to choose the most effective verb in writing the objectives for my lessons. I also learned the difference between
a performance outcome and an instructional objective.
Next school year, I will be better able to create objectives that are truly valid. They will be objectives that are specific,
measurable, and observable. To evaluate our lesson on instructional objectives, we could differentiate between instructional
objectives and performance outcomes. We could also determine if instructional objectives are written poorly or not, when given
a list of objectives. I will be sure to share the components of a valid objective with my colleagues and those in the district.
June 5, 2008
Dr. Potter returned on today. She presented us with some data on the test scores of sixth, seventh and eighth grade students
at one particular middle school. From the data, we were assigned to get into groups and have a debate based on what we would
do to increase the scores. We had to include several components, such as assessment, planning, instruction, organization,
and cooperative learning, in our discussion.
My group expressed that we would first administer a pretest that would provide insight on the students' specific strengths
and weaknesses. We also spoke of learning centers which would not only enhance organization in the classroom, but also allow
the students to receive individual instruction as well as immediate feedback from their teacher. These centers would also
be favorable for English Language Learners (ELL). Our opposing team discussed ways to involve the parents and to increase
motivation in the students. Later, we took a test pertaining to data analysis.
The lesson that we participated in with Dr. Potter helped me to better diagnose a student and be able to prescribe the
best resolution for the problem. Next year, I will know that a pretest would be the first thing to do in order to find the
specific strengths and weaknesses of my students. I will also involve the parents more often and collaborate with my colleagues
to better serve my students.
The debate that we had was an assessment in itself. I would prefer a similar activity where we had to figure out a solution
for a group of students' low test scores as an evaluation. I will share the solutions that we discussed in our groups with
my colleagues and those in my district.