The Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Standard 4: Content Knowledge

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

The artifact that best encapsulates InTASC Standard 4 is my Strategy Lesson II

Rationale

The InTASC standards that best exemplify the included artifact are:

4(a) The teacher effectively uses multiple representations and explanations that capture key ideas in the discipline, guide learners through learning progressions, and promote each learner’s achievement of content standards.

4(b) The teacher engages students in learning experiences in the discipline(s) that encourage learners to understand, question, and analyze ideas from diverse perspectives so that they master the content.

4(c) The teacher engages learners in applying methods of inquiry and standards of evidence used in the discipline.

4(d) The teacher stimulates learner reflection on prior content knowledge, links new concepts to familiar concepts, and makes connections to learners’ experiences.

4(e) The teacher recognizes learner misconceptions in a discipline that interfere with learning, and creates experiences to build accurate conceptual understanding.

4(f) The teacher evaluates and modifies instructional resources and curriculum materials for their comprehensiveness, accuracy for representing particular concepts in the discipline, and appropriateness for his/her learners.

4(g) The teacher uses supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all learners.

4(m) The teacher knows how to integrate culturally relevant content to build on learners’ background knowledge.

4(o) The teacher realizes that content knowledge is not a fixed body of facts but is complex, culturally situated, and ever evolving. S/he keeps abreast of new ideas and understandings in the field.

4(p) The teacher appreciates multiple perspectives within the discipline and facilitates learners’ critical analysis of these perspectives.

A description of the artifact, when it was created, the purpose and process of its creation:

The included artifact was created as an assignment for Reading and Multiple Literacies: an essential class in the Education Development and Training program at University of Maryland University College. The main goal in creating this artifact was to implement an assigned reading strategy into a lesson plan, and to create a presentation about said reading strategy. This assignment was completed in teams that were organized homogeneously by content area, and our assigned strategy was Activating and Connecting Background Knowledge. As a team, we decided to use a KWL chart to implement our reading strategy. We also decided to have students complete a research project that they would present to the class, instead of lecturing or providing reading material to connect background knowledge. Students would be expected to take notes on each presentation before finishing the last column of the KWL chart. We thought this assignment would be a challenging and interactive way to encourage students to build their digital literacy skills in a heterogeneous group setting.

How does this artifact demonstrate achievement of Standard 4: Content Knowledge?

Part of what Standard 4: Content Knowledge asks of teachers is that students are taught to use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all learners. It also requires that the teacher is aware of how to integrate culturally relevant content to build on learners’ background knowledge. In Strategy Lesson II, students will activate background knowledge, ethically research information about William Shakespeare, and discuss why this information is relevant. Students will also be encouraged to understand, question, and analyze ideas from diverse perspectives so that they master the content, by researching different topics related to Shakespeare from a variety of online resources.

How has my understanding of the standard been affected by the creation of this artifact?

Through the creation of this artifact, I have become more familiar with stimulating learner reflection of background content knowledge. I have also gained more experience planning to ask students to link new concepts to familiar concepts, and to make connections to learners’ experiences outside of the classroom. Previously, I was not familiar with the organized process of activating background knowledge. I was also unaware of the importance of asking students to activate background knowledge before beginning a new unit or piece of literature. As I was creating the presentation for this project, I read through a variety of studies that showcased the benefits teachers discovered when they implemented the activation of background knowledge. When background knowledge was activated, it was generally easier for students to understand new concepts, as they had a basis for application. I can recall asking students to compare information I was currently teaching to experiences from their lives outside of school, but this was never a planned activity and was quick and in passing. I now understand how it would benefit students if I were to take time in class to activate background knowledge as an assignment, before making a valuable connections.

What are my strengths related to this standard? What do I need to improve on?

In relation to Standard 4: Content Knowledge I believe I need to improve on fostering learners' critical analysis of perspectives within the bounds of the English Classroom. While this artifact challenges students to research information and connect background knowledge to new content, it does not directly ask them to form an opinion. Students are expected to understand how William Shakespeare's work is still relevant even though it was written long ago, but their opinion about the matter is never requested. It is important to make sure students are provided opportunities to analyze information and form personal opinions. Another area I need to improve on would be my follow through of the activation of background knowledge. I included an opportunity for students to recall information that could be applied to the lesson, but I did not plan on what I would do if students did not have answers for the know section of their KWL chart. My initial idea was that students would be able to fill in their chart while other students provide answers out loud to the class, but unfortunately this could result in students becoming self-conscious because they could not answer the questions on their own. Next time I create a lesson that focuses on activating background knowledge, I will consider different possible outcomes of the lesson.

One of my strengths that emerged in the creation of this artifact was my ability to create a lesson that helps students realize, content knowledge is not a fixed body of facts but is complex, culturally situated, and ever evolving. By showing students they can connect background knowledge to new content, they will come to understand that information is never independent. This gives additional value to the content of any lesson, as students will expect to use information from one lesson to premise the next. Showing students that content can be spread across units and sometimes even classes, cultivates a greater understanding of why information is being taught and why it is valuable to remember.

Artifacts

Strategy Lesson II:

With Supplemental Reading Strategy Presentation