Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency
Course Syllabus
Course Title: Differentiated Instruction Cadre
Instructor: Ann Craig, Linda Mannhardt, Nicole Peterson
Contact Information: Ann-344-6272 Linda 344-6524 Nicole 344-6583
Email Address:
[email protected] [email protected]
[email protected]
Location: Mississippi Bend AEA
Dates
January 25, 2011
February 15, 2011
March 8, 2011
April 15, 2011
May 3, 2011
Times
Other
8:30-3:30
8:30-3:30
8:30-3:30
8:30-3:30
4:30-6:30
All assignments due by: May 3, 2011
Dates grades will be posted: May 19,2011
Course description: Based on the work of Carol Ann Tomlinson participants will learn
and incorporate the principles of high quality differentiation to designs units of
instruction that will address the variances in their students.
Course outcomes and evaluation:
Outcome: Complete a Unit KUD and aligned preassessment. Administer
preassessment to class
Evaluation: Participants will submit KUD and preassessment with student scores
Outcome: Design respectful tasks that are differentiated based on student needs
Evaluation: Participants will submit plans including the tasks designed to meet
student needs
Outcome: Design Formative and Summative assessments aligned to unit KUD
Evaluation: Participants will submit their formative and summative assessments for
the unit.
Outcome: Participants will gather/analyze/reflect student pre/post data for unit
effectiveness
Evaluation: Particpants will present findings on data board.
Grading criteria:
Assignment
KUD and
Due Date
Feb. 15, 2011
Grade
score on the
Other
Revised: 11-21-2008
Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency
Course Syllabus
Preassessment
Respectful tasks
Formative and
Summative
assessments
March 8, 2011
April 15, 2011
rubric = A or Pass
score on the
rubric = B or Pass
score on the
rubric = C
score on the
rubric = D
score on the
rubric = F
Note: 100% attendance is required to pass any course offered through the
Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency.
Participants taking the course for Relicensure must earn an “A” or “B” to pass the
course. All the course work needs to be completed.
Teacher impact statement: By applying research and best practices to unit design
implementing effective differentiation teachers will improve students knowledge,
understanding and skills within the disciplines.
Student impact statement: It is believed that through differentiating instruction that the
needs of all students are bettter met which in turn ensures a higher rate of successful
completion of course work which then impacts a school's graduation rate.
Iowa Teaching or Leadership Standards being addressed:
Teaching Standard
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Outline of course content:
Date or Session
January 25, 2011
February 15, 2011
March 8, 2011
Leadership Standard
NA
Content
Content, process, product
differentiation
Learning goals (KUD)
Preassessment
Strategies to address
readiness, interest and
product.
Formative assessment
Analyzing student work
Additional strategies to
address student variance
Other
Revised: 11-21-2008
Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency
Course Syllabus
April 15, 2011
May 3, 2011
Summative performance
assessments
Sharing your experience
Critiquing DI units
Iowa Professional Development Model (IPDM):X
Theory:15%
Demonstration:25%
Practice: Collaboration (coaching, feedback, reflection): 60%
Course materials:
Other:
COURSE RUBRIC
TITLE of the Course: Differentiated Instruction Cadre
Name:
OUTCOMES
Outcome
1: Participants
create/administer a
KUD and
preassessment for a
unit of instruction
Outcome 2:
Participants will
design respectful
takes that
differentiate for
student readiness,
interest and
learning profile
within the unit
Exemplary
Score: 25
Accomplished
Score: 22
.See Attached
KUD Rubric
Preassessment
aligns with the
KUD goals.
Includes
questions that
lead to
information
about student
understanding.
Evaluated and
recorded
results in a
way that
identifies
student
differences for
separate
aspects of the
KUD.
Unit design
template and
accompanying
lesson
materials
clearly
establish
thorough
alignment to
the 5 key
principles of
Preassessment
aligns with the
KUD goals.
Includes
questions that
lead to
information
about student
understanding.
Evaluated and
recorded results
in a way that
identifies
student
differences for
some parts of
the KUD.
Unit design
template and
accompanying
lesson materials
establish a
complete
alignment to
the 5 key
principles of
differentiation
according to
Developing
Score: 20
Beginning
Score: 18
Preassessment
aligns with the
KUD goals.
Includes questions
that lead to
information about
student
understanding.
Evaluated and
recorded results
but do not indicate
student
differences in
parts of the KUD
Preassessment
aligns with the
KUD goals.
Includes
questions that
lead to
information
about student
understanding.
Results are
only scored
Unit design
template and
accompanying
lesson materials
establish adequate
alignment to the 5
key principles of
differentiation
according to
student readiness,
interest and
Unit design
template and
accompanying
lesson
materials do
not establish
adequate
alignment to
the 5 key
principles of
differentiation
SCORE
Total:
Revised: 11-21-2008
Mississippi Bend Area Education Agency
Course Syllabus
plan.
differentiation
according to
student
readiness,
interest and
learning
profile.
Details
provided in the
unit design are
clear, relevant
and well
organized. All
materials
provide a
thorough
understanding
of the unit
design process
Outcome 3:
Participants will
design/administer
formative and
summative
assessments for the
unit of instruction
Outcome 4:
Participants will
gather/analyze/reflect
student pre/post data
for unit effectiveness
See outcome
2
student
readiness,
interest and
learning profile.
Details provided
in the unit
design are
clear, relevant
and well
organized. All
materials
provide a strong
understanding
of the unit
design process.
learning profile. 12 of the 5 key
principles are
missing. Some
details provided in
the unit design are
clear, relevant and
well organized. All
materials provide
an adequate
understanding of
the unit design
process
according to
student
readiness,
interest and
learning profile.
More than 2 of
the 5 key
principles are
missing.
Details
provided in the
unit design lack
clarity. The
materials
reflect little
evidence of
understanding
the unit design
process.
See attached
sheet
Comments: 100-90 = A, 89-80 = B, 78-70 = C 69 and below = F
Revised: 11-21-2008