Instructional techniques and assessment

To me, this competency means being able to teach in a way that actually responds to where students are at, instead of just delivering the same lesson to everyone and hoping it works. It is about choosing teaching approaches, cues, progressions, and assessments that help make learning clearer and more meaningful for different students. I also think assessment is a huge part of this, because if I do not really know what students are understanding, struggling with, or improving at, then my teaching is mostly guesswork. So for me, this competency is about making instruction and assessment work together so students feel supported, challenged, and more aware of their own learning. 

On this page I have organized my artifacts into two main sources. They are artifacts that show how I thought about teaching and learning conceptually, and artifacts that show how I gathered evidence of student learning in practice. The first source is my academic review of Butler, which shows how I was thinking more critically about pedagogy, questioning, and how understanding is developed in game-based learning. The second source includes both my Smashball student self-reflection form and my teacher assessment of student learning, because together they show how I was trying to assess where students were at through both student voice and my own observation. I grouped them this way because I think Instructional Techniques and Assessment is really about the connection between how I think about teaching and how I actually check whether learning is happening.

EPHE 437 Artifacts

Connection to Competencie

My academic review of Butler, Smashball student self-reflection form, and teacher assessment of student learning support my self-reflection in Instructional Practices because together they show that I am developing across pedagogy, planning, and assessment in ways that connect to the competency definition. For pedagogical skills, I put myself in developing, and I think that fits because Butler’s article pushed me to think more carefully about how game understanding does not just happen because students are active. Butler argues that understanding needs to be intentionally developed through questioning and constructivist teaching, not left to chance through game play alone (Butler, 1997). That connects directly to my own teaching because I was trying to use teaching styles and game-based approaches more intentionally, but I am still developing consistency in how well I apply those approaches throughout a full lesson.

For planning skills, I also put myself in developing, and I think the student self-reflection form supports that. The form shows that I was planning for more than just technical skill, because I asked students about rallying, decision-making, and contributing to a fair learning environment. That reflects a broader view of learning and lines up with Butler’s point that teachers need to be clear about what students are actually supposed to understand in games, not just what they are supposed to do physically (Butler, 1997). It also connects to play-practice-play, where students first meet a tactical problem in the game, then practice in a more focused way, and then return to the game to apply what they learned in context (Hopper, 2025). Even with that, I still think developing is the fairest level because I am still working on making my lessons flow more consistently and making the learning goals more visible from start to finish.

For assessment skills, I again put myself in developing, and I think the teacher assessment sheet and student self-reflection form make that clear. The teacher assessment artifact shows that I was trying to notice where students were at across psychomotor, cognitive, affective, and social learning rather than only focusing on one area. The self-reflection form also gave students a voice in that process. That connects to Rink’s point that teachers need to deliberately select observation cues, monitor student responses, and use feedback to keep students focused and progressing (Rink, 2014). At the same time, I am still developing in how consistently I use that information during instruction rather than mainly after the lesson.

References

Butler, J. (1997). How would Socrates teach games? A constructivist approach. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 68(9), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.1997.10605029

Hopper, T. (2025). Game-based approaches in physical education: Tennis: Complexity thinking and emergent learning (Chap. 13). [Course text excerpt].

Rink, J. E. (2014). Teaching during activity. In Teaching physical education for learning (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

My goal is to improve how I assess learning during and after lessons so I can respond to students more effectively. In my next unit or sequence of lessons, I want to use at least three forms of assessment: my own observation, a simple tracking tool or checklist, and a student self-reflection. I also want to make sure the self-reflection is introduced before the end of the unit, not after, so I can actually use it to adjust instruction while learning is still happening. This goal matters to me because assessment is the area where I feel I still have the most room to grow, especially in using it to support student confidence, ownership, and progress.