Teacher

Description

Overview:
The purpose of this course is for adult learners to improve their communication skills, particularly writing, by arguing effectively for a raise. Their arguments will consist of evidence-based claims. The target audience of this lesson is adults at the 7th grade reading and writing level. This lesson is intended for a real classroom. This module involves reading, writing and speaking components. The entire lesson will take roughly 30 minutes to complete.
Subject:
English Language Arts
Level:
Middle School, Adult Education
Grades:
Grade 6, Grade 7, Grade 8
Material Type:
Full Course
Author:
Date Added:
01/17/2017
License:
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
Language:
English
Media Format:
Downloadable docs, Graphics/Photos, Text/HTML

Comments

*
Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.7.1: Strong (2)

This lesson covers all elements of the standard except using credible sources. Since the exercise only uses a fictitious scenario, there is no opportunity for the learner to research a credible source. Perhaps adding a component that allows the learner to research salary data on payscale.com would solve this problem.

Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.4: Superior (3)

The Evidence-Based Writing rubric helps to ensure learners meet the expectations of this standard.

Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

Opportunities for Deeper Learning: Superior (3)

This lesson:
* has appropriate scaffolding with the model for the argument in the PPT presentation
* identifies three deeper skills (applying knowledge to real world, communicating effectively and constructing a viable argument)
* provides an adequate range of cognitive demands

Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

Quality of Instructional and Practice Exercises: Strong (2)

There a sufficient number of well-written exercises to support the development of the targeted skills, but there is no feedback during the guided practice. Perhaps adding a peer-to-peer feedback component would boost the effectiveness of the guided practice and ensure learners are on the right track.

Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

Quality of Assessments: Limited (1)

The evaluation component is underdeveloped because it asks for volunteers to present an argument for critique, which means that learners who do not volunteer do not get evaluated.

Rema Merrick
on Apr 30, 05:58am Evaluation

Utility of Materials Designed to Support Teaching: Strong (2)

There are no suggestions for using the materials with different learners.

Standards

Evaluations

Achieve OER

Average Score (3 Points Possible)
Degree of Alignment2.8 (3 users)
Quality of Explanation of the Subject Matter3 (3 users)
Utility of Materials Designed to Support Teaching2.3 (3 users)
Quality of Assessments2.3 (3 users)
Quality of Technological InteractivityN/A
Quality of Instructional and Practice Exercises2.3 (3 users)
Opportunities for Deeper Learning3 (3 users)

Tags (5)