Overall Instructor Rating: Exemplary
Ratings explanation:
- Exemplary - A model answer in almost every way (this is given out very rarely).
- Satisfactory - Very well done; you've met the expectations of the assignment. There are some minor problems, so read my feedback well.
- Marginal Pass - You pass, but there are lots of issues to consider. Read my feedback very carefully and be sure you understand the points/issues I raise.
- Not satisfactory, redo and resubmit - The assignment was not completed appropriately. I am concerned that you do not understand the process well enough yet. To get credit for the assignment, you need to redo it, most probably on another topic. Read and consider my feedback very carefully before redoing.
Instructor's Overall Feedback:
(Feedback given by Younghee Woo; concurred by Lloyd Rieber.)
Overall, your design is excellent. You seem to understand the formative evaluation process well.
The objective of this activity is to plan for the formative evaluation of your instruction. As stated by Dick, Carey, and Carey (2001): "Formative evaluation is the process designers use to obtain data that can be used to revise their instruction to make it more efficient and effective. The emphasis in formative evlauation is on the collection and analysis of data and the revision of the instruction" (p. 284-285).
Using the lesson you have described in the IDA on lesson design, complete the Formative Evaluation Planning Worksheet. Using the table below, describe:
- Who will do the ongoing evaluation;
- What is being evaluated;
- When the evaluation should occur; and
- How the evaluation will be conducted (i.e. tools you will use)
Be sure to refer to Dick, Carey, and Carey Chapter 10 for specific information that can be gathered from experts (e.g. subject-matter, learning, and learner) and learners in different formative evaluation situations (e.g. one-to-one, small-group, and field trials).
Formative Evaluation Planning Worksheet
Write the instructional objectives of your lesson here (it can be more than one):
Your final response:
COMMENTS - Yes, at first glance it does appear to be a great deal of material (I believe Dr. Rieber expressed the same concern). However, many of these activities listed below are quick-paced; however, if need be, the lesson could span two adjacent class periods.
Conceptual Objective: Beat is a steady pulse which governs rhythm.
Behavioral Objectives:
1) KNOWLEDGE -- Following an initial lecture by the instructor, SWBAT name and describe two phenomenon that have a steady pulse. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 95% of students.
2) COMPREHENSION -- Following an initial lecture by the instructor, SWBAT provide examples of two phenomenon that do not have a steady pulse. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 95% of students.
3) APPLICATION -- Following group and individual activities, SWBAT demonstrate a steady pulse with the use of claves and/or other indefinite pitch auxilliary percussion instruments. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 90% of students.
4) ANALYSIS -- Following presentation of recorded musical excerpts and live performance by instructor of musical excerpts, SWBAT determine and discuss whether a performed rhythm contains a steady pulse, or an unsteady pulse. They will demonstrate this determination by standing for a steady pulse, and sitting for an unsteady pulse. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 90% of students.
5) SYNTHESIS -- After selecting from a variety of "instruments" (including hand clapping, finger snapping, tongue clicking, other instruments, etc.), SWBAT improvise two short rhythms: one demonstrating a steady pulse, and the other demonstrating an unsteady pulse. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 85% of students.
6) EVALUATION -- As the remaining students listen to each performance (from # 5, above), SWBAT compare and contrat the two performed rhythms and critique if they were indeed clear and accurate examples of steady and unsteady rhythms. The instruction is deemed successful when mastered by 85% of students.
The instructor's feedback to this step:
Very detailed!
Write your objective using the correct form. Click here for advice on writing objectives.
HTML formatting reminder: You can embed HTML tags directly in your responses. This will be help your buddies and the instructor view your information in a more readable fashion. For example, if you want a paragraph break somewhere, just enter <p>:
I will have the experts review the lesson on three levels:
<p>
1. content; 2. technical accuracy; 3. quality of instruction.
<p>
The content review will help ensure that no mistakes were made in the information provided to the learners.
Who |
What |
When |
How |
| Experts (subject-matter, learning, learner) |
Your final response:
The lesson will be reviewed by three band director peers. These experts will review the lesson for three characteristics:
1. content; 2. technical accuracy; 3. quality of instruction
The content review will be made in order to ensure that all items presented without mistakes; that all lesson items are interrelated conceptually; that lessson items are presented in the most effective sequence.
The technical accuracy will examine proper use of Bloom's taxonomy; proper statement of conceptual objective,etc.
The quality of instruction will check for proper allotment for student participation, etc.
|
Your final response:
Expert peer review will be condcuted at least 1-2 weeks prior to instructional implementation of lesson, in order to allow time for instructor modification and revision based on expert feedback. Therefore, expert feedback will occur during the early developmental stage of lesson design. (Expert feedback should also precede learner feedback.)
|
Your final response:
Several sources of informatinon will be used: informal group discussion, expert survey/questionnaire, possible checklists, etc.
COMMENTS - If I use a questionnaire, it will be very simple in format, designed to elecit free responses from the experts.
|
The instructor's feedback to this step:
You did a good job here. You seem to understand the expert review process well. This looks very good, but I recommend that you make clear who are experts for reviewing the content, technical accuracy, and quality of instruction. |
| Learners: one-to-one |
Your final response:
3-4 learners, which match multiple characteristics of the intended instructional group (grade level, past band experience, etc.), will be selected. They will be evaluating the
"learnability" of the lesson (to quote Dr. Rieber). Basically, they will evaluate the lesson content (to a small part) but much more, they will speak to the compatability of the lesson with their previous gained knowledge, their particular learning "style", lesson complexity, lesson engagement, etc.
|
Your final response:
One-to-one learner review will occur at least one week prior to actual instructional implementation of lesson, in order to allow time for instructor modification and revision based on student-centered feedback. Therefore, learner one-to-one feedback will occur approximately mid-way in the lesson development process, and should precede learner: small group feedback.
|
Your final response:
A "mock" session of the lesson will be presented (similar to a "dress rehearsal") - during which the instructor will consistently gather data from the individual learners via questionnaire worksheets, generalized teacher observation, classroom discussion, etc.
COMMENTS - I agree, the open discussion will most likely produce more information; however, there may be more "inhibited" learners that can express themselves more freely in writing, rather than speaking in front of a group."
|
The instructor's feedback to this step:
This looks very appropriate. |
| Learners: small-group |
Your final response:
This is similar in format to the "one-to-one" session listed above - the primary difference being the utilization of a larger group of students, most likely 5-7 students of similar characteristics as those listed above (similar to the full size class which is scheduled to receive this instruction). The students will speak to the same lesson characteristics as those listed for the one-to-one sample group above.
|
Your final response:
Small-group review will occur at least 3-4 days prior to actual instructional implementation of lesson, in order to allow time for instructor modification and revision based on student-centered feedback. Therefore, learner: small-group feedback should occur near the conclusion of the lesson development process, and should precede actual learner: field trial.
COMMENTS - Perhaps 3-4 is a bit ambitous . . . I may need to "bump up" all of the steps of the formative assessment by a few days, up to a week.
|
Your final response:
Data will be gathered in numerous forms, similar to the one-to-one session detailed above. Data gathering tools will include teacher observation, pre-lesson assessments, post-lesson assessments (both likely in the form of a generalized questionnaire regarding both student conceptual knowledge and expressed opinions regarding instruction), etc.
|
The instructor's feedback to this step:
Excellent! Very well designed. |
| Learners: field trial |
Your final response:
The field trial will be the only evaluation utilizing the full and complete group of students which will eventually receive this instruction. Again, they are evaluating general characteristics of the lesson in terms of its "learnability" and "applicability" in terms of their current knowledge-base and level of instructional comfortability.
|
Your final response:
The learners: field trial will occur a few days prior to actual instructional implementation of lesson, in order to allow time for last-minute instructor revision. This is the final step of formative evaluation prior to implemetation of instruction.
|
Your final response:
Student assessments will parallel those of the learners: one-to-one and learners: small-group trials listed above - the primary difference in data gathering and student input lies with the fact that this is the entire subject group, rather than a subset. This could present data in one of two forms: evidence of greater variability, or more centering towards a group mean (average) - both in terms of qualitative and quantitative feedback regarding the lesson.
COMMENTS - Good suggestion, Dan . . . I will make sure that I "qualify", or "characterize", or "temper" the results with each respective student.
|
The instructor's feedback to this step:
Excellent! I just recommend that you need add the evaluation methods such as observation and interview and so on. |
|