Clinical Field Experience C: Planning Instructional Units

Jama Dollar

College of Education, Grand Canyon University

EAD-520-IO8180: Strengthening Curricular Programs to Promote Continuous School

Improvement

Jeffrey Mehlenbacher

September 8, 2022
 Clinical Field Experience C: Planning Instructional Units

Interview 1

For this assignment, the Leadership Candidate interviewed a teacher from her own school

district and a teacher which works in a different state. The purpose was to gain a wider

perspective.

The first interview was conducted with a teacher working at an elementary school in

Illinois. This teacher is an intervention teacher currently working with students in primary

grades of kindergarten through second grade.

The interviewee shared the importance of planning to prepare for instruction. As a team,

the teachers at her school review the scope and sequence of when and how standards will be

taught. Developing a specific plan which reviews standards and instructional timelines, ensures

the lessons align to state standards. The teacher explained her district is using state mandated

assessments three times a year. During the initial assessment, students’ skills are assessed, and

teachers begin to formulate a better understanding of students needs. The teacher and candidate

discussed this is not the only tool used to determine students’ instructional needs and it is used

more as a diagnostic to alert teachers of the possibility of students’ deficits. The teachers at her

school use a triangulation approach to home in on students’ instructional needs. A plan is then

developed to determine what intervention will be provided as part of an action plan, how it will

be monitored and an instructional timeline. This plan is instrumental in planning instruction. The

teacher shared the teachers at her school are working together to plan units. As part of ongoing

planning, the team meets twice a month to evaluate progress and determine next steps. This step

ensures that content and learning objectives are being met. In addition, technology is utilized and
a big piece of the puzzle during planning sessions. Teacher access data from state assessments,

review web-based progress monitoring, develop technology based specialized instruction such as

sight word slides. Because the team has established an action plan for each student’s

intervention, the instruction embodies high expectation for students and creates differentiation

based on students’ needs.

During planning sessions, instructional strategies for interventions are determined.

Interestingly, the interviewee’s district gives very little directives for specific intervention

programs. The teacher explained the current superintendent encourages schools to seek guidance

from intervention and reading specialist. It was explained that is has not always been the norm.

The teacher believes this autonomy is because of school quarantines and closures and the current

political climate. The interviewee shared teachers at her school are fully immersed in

incorporating technology into student instruction. All students are assigned Chromebooks.

Teachers assess lesson materials from web-based platforms and use screens and interactive

boards. Students can access leveled readers and other materials through their devices.

During the interview, the teacher discussed the school developed the mission statement.

She shared her principal often refers to the mission statement when introducing new initiatives.

The principal reminds the staff their jobs are not to do what is easy but rather to do what is right.

During planning, the mission statement helps to keep teams on track to plan and provide rigorous

instruction.

Interview 2

The Leadership Candidate’s second interview was conducted with an ESE teacher that

provides instructional support to student identified as disabled in grades kindergarten through

third grade in a separate class setting. During the interview, the importance of planning and

preparing for classroom instruction was discussed. The teacher shared she must present both on-

grade level and instructional level curriculum. One of the challenges the teacher discussed was

she is the only primary separate class teacher on campus. This is challenging because she often

feels as though she “creates the wheel” in isolation. The teacher explained she shares a common

planning time with first grade teachers. This is helpful because if supports her as she plans on-

grade level instruction for her first-grade students. The teacher shared she works closely with the

school’s academic coach to create unit instructional plans.

During the interview, the teacher shared the state has changed their testing format from

one test in the spring for students in third grade and up to all students participating in statewide

assessment three times a year. Another change which occurred this school year is the

superintendent’s decision to eliminate a computerized diagnostic tool formerly used with

students in grades kindergarten through second grade. The teacher believes technology-based

data will be available to support lesson and unit planning but is unclear what that will look like at

this point. During the conversation, the candidate asked the teacher if she has concerns about so

many uncertainties. The teacher responded teachers have become so accustomed to following

the curriculum, they are struggling to trust their skills with collecting data and making

instructional decisions based on individual student needs. She believes the change will

ultimately be a positive thing but may cause anxiety until teachers are sure of the expectations.

The interviewee discussed her belief the teachers at her school embody high expectations

for students’ learning. She believes the challenge is when students have not developed

foundational skills needed to understand and progress with on-grade levels standards. Teachers

often seem to struggle with understanding standards above or below grade level expectations.
Teachers often ask the interviewee for instructional strategies. Most teachers seeking her advice

are genuinely attempting to meet students at their instructional level however others view

remediation as someone else’s job. These teachers ask how students can be staffed into

Exceptional Student Education (ESE) classes.

During the interview, the candidate asked the teacher how she assures content and

learning objectives are met. The teacher shared she follows the scope and sequence provided in

the curriculum map. She shared it is difficult for her students to master grade levels skills

introduced. The teacher’s students are assessed using ongoing in-program progress monitoring,

individual assessments, and progress toward IEP goals. This data allows the teacher to ensure

content and learning objectives are being met.

The teacher shared our district is strict in their guidance of what instructional materials

are used and when. In addition, to specific core and intervention curriculum, the teacher is

required to complete daily lesson gained charts. These charts are submitted to the ESE program

specialist for review. If students are not progressing through the curriculum at expected rates,

the program specialist and the teacher discuss strategies and options to address concerns with

instructional pace.

The teacher explained she incorporates technology and instructional strategies into her

lessons daily. She uses a variety of digital learning platforms as well as low tech devices such as

voice output devices.

During the interview, the candidate asked how the school’s vision and mission

statements are incorporated into lesson planning and goals. The teacher explained the school

mission statement includes maintaining respectful school environment. She supports this by
teaching social skills, modeling, and sharing expectations frequently. In addition, she often

shares her expectation of “work before play”, uses visual supports, and maintains academic

focus to ensure students are developing and progressing with skill development.

Reflection and Impact on Future Practice

Upon completion of teacher interviews, the Leadership Candidate reflected on the

conversations and considered future professional practice. Both teachers interviewed

demonstrated a knowledge of pedagogy and understanding of the importance of providing

differentiated instruction. The candidate was struck by the systematic approach used at one of

the teacher’s schools. While the candidate’s district incorporates Problem Solving Team

interventions, the process is far less structured and relies solely on individual teachers to initiate

the process. In the out of state school, the team addressed every student that demonstrates

deficits on state testing and screeners. This led the candidate to consider PSEL Standard 4

“effective educational leaders develop and support intellectually rigorous and coherent systems

of curriculum, instruction, and assessment to promote each student’s academic success and well-

being” (NPBEA, 2015). As a future leader, the candidate would develop a systematic approach

to reviewing data and developing individualized action plans for students displaying deficits.

Another difference between schools is the teacher from another state discussed systematic

approach to triangulate if students’ poor performance was due to possible student inattentiveness

or if the student truly displayed deficits. The in-district teacher discussed teachers struggle to

have the tools to assess students’ skills without computerized testing results. This realization

helped the Leadership Candidate understand the importance of promoting “instructional practice

that is consistent with knowledge of child learning and development, effective pedagogy, and the

needs of each student” (NPBEA, 2015). As part of a future practice plan, the candidate will seek
professional development opportunities for teachers to ensure they have the skills and tools

needed to assess students’ skills that will assist them with determining if students’ performance

on evaluations are valid and truly reflect students’ instructional needs.

 Reference:

National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015. Professional Standards for
Educational Leaders, https://www.npbea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Professional-
Standards-for-Educational-Leaders_2015.pdf