Student Growth Goal 2017-18 – 6th/8th

All students will demonstrate proficiency in writing arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant evidence
Growth Goal Statement in writing as measured by a common writing rubric. Specifically, 90 - 100% of my students will improve between 5 - 15%
in their ability to use reasoning to support their claim as measured by the writing rubric.
There are 51 students in my two 6th grade Language Arts classes. They are a diverse group that includes six students with
Student Demographics IEPs. I have 25 8th graders; 4 have IEPs and 2 have 504s with academic requirements.
th
6 Grade Data:
Teaching Rationale & Strategy Pre-Assessment Data & Data Story Data Story - % of Students Proficient
Pre-Assessment: All students completed a
common CER pre-assessment in October 2017. % PROFICIENT – 6th Pre-Asmt Post-Asmt
The majority of students scored a 2 out of 6 on Claim 15% 94%
the reasoning portion of their CER, which is Evidence 29% 100%
below proficient (4 of 6). At this point, only 11 Reasoning 1% 73%
students had a score of 3 or 4 for their
reasoning.
Although my goal relates to reasoning within
argument writing, I could not effectively focus on Caption: All students completed a common CER
reasoning without first making sure students post-assessment in April 2018. All students
understood and could craft a credible, specific improved in their ability to use reasoning to
claim. Likewise, once that claim was written, Caption: All students improved in their ability to support their claims. The majority of students
students needed to focus on evidence next. My craft claims, provide specific evidence to back up scored in the proficient range (4 out of 6).
instruction concentrated on finding and using those claims, and use reasoning to support their
strong, specific evidence and ensuring that it was claims.
Intervention strategy(ies) added after interim
directly related to proving a claim. assessment and before post-assessment:
Intervention strategies added after interim-
G Reflection on individual progress as
Intervention strategies after pre-assessment assessment and before post-assessment:
argument writers is a part of student
and before interim-assessment: D Micro-progressions were utilized to help growth and learning.
A Graphic organizers/checklists were students understand specific ways to
utilized to help students organize their improve their reasoning.
TEACHING RATIONALE: These
thoughts and see the connections E Student-to-student and teacher intervention strategies were intentionally
between the elements of argument mentoring/small groups were utilized to put in this order. Graphic organizers,
essays. help students see specific examples of mentor texts, and anchor charts are more
B Mentor texts were utilized to provide reasoning and how to use it. Students were structured; micro-progressions and
models for students. These mentor texts paired/grouped based on their reasoning individual/small group conversations are
included published essays, teacher abilities. less structured and fit better after
models, and excellent segments from F Visible thinking routines were utilized students develop a level of competency
other students’ writing. throughout to help students think more with argument writing.
C Anchor charts were utilized to remind deeply about their topics and their writing
students of the teaching points we had strategies. The +1 routine was particularly
covered. helpful.
Evidence of Student Growth: Olivia Bishay (typical 6th grade student; slightly lower reading comprehension as measured by Gates test)
Pre-assessment reflection: On our argument
writing pre-assessment, Olivia scored a 7/18
overall on the CER rubric and 1/6 on the
reasoning portion. Olivia’s writing lacked
organization, evidence and explanations.
Interventions: Olivia responded well to graphic
organizers and anchor charts posted in the
classroom but also needed one-on-one
instruction from me and small group peer
editing with stronger student writers.
Interim- assessment reflection: Olivia’s use of
evidence greatly improved from the initial
argument writing assessment; however, her
reasoning only slightly improved. She was able to
begin using sentence starters (“This shows that…”)
and had a preliminary understanding of why
reasoning is necessary.
Interventions: Micro-progressions helped Olivia
and other students learn specific ways to make
their reasoning stronger. We starting using this
strategy with teacher-identified ways to make
reasoning more effective and moved to student-
identified.
Interventions (continued): Peer editing with
carefully selected partners also helped Olivia
develop her argument writing skills and particularly
her reasoning abilities. Conferring with me was
also helpful, and I conferred with her alone, in
partnerships, and in small groups. Self-assessment
was an important part of our conferences:
 What did you do well/better than before?
 What do you need help with?
 What is your goal in this draft?
Post-assessment reflection: Olivia’s post-
assessment (below) showed good growth in
her ability to use reasoning. She moved from
merely restating her claim to a fuller
explanation. Olivia’s reasoning score moved
from 1 to 4, which is a 50% increase. Below
is a paragraph from Olivia’s final CER. Her
reasoning has moved beyond restating her
claim to a better connection to her claim.
“One reason pit bulls should not be allowed
as a pet is because of violence. A boy had to
get 2,000 stitches because he was attacked
by a pit bull. His father said he was choking
on his own blood. Pit bulls have been a
problem for people because no one wants
them as pets because of how violent they
are.”
Interventions: Olivia continued to use the
strategies and interventions mentioned
earlier. We also added Calkins’ checklists at
the end of assignments. Our use of micro-
progressions allowed Olivia to see specific
ways to add reasoning to her writing and
make it better.
Evidence of Student Growth: Luke Giorgi (6th grade student with lower reading comprehension and untreated ADHD; shared with W. Wilcox)
Pre-assessment reflection: Early in the year,
Luke’s ability to use reasoning to explain his
evidence was limited. His reasoning score was a
2/6 on a common argument writing rubric.
Luke’s score reflects a lack of ability and interest
in writing. This is also related to his lower
reading comprehension. It’s difficult to provide
evidence and explain it if a student cannot
understand the reading material.
Intervention: Luke made good use of graphic
organizers to understand his evidence. My
colleagues and I revised Calkins’ checklists and
rubrics to make them more student-friendly.
Luke needed reminders to use the anchor charts
in the classroom but could understand and use
them when prompted.
Anchor chart in classroom
“That’s why parents should get involved” was
Luke’s reasoning based on his claim that kids
should not bully other kids. Unfortunately, the
prompt required Luke to argue whether parents
should be punished for their child’s bullying.
8th Grade Data:
Interim- assessment reflection: Our interim
assessment was our research paper, and Luke
followed a structured format, including:
 Continued use of graphic organizers
 Continued use of anchor charts
 Micro-progressions (not as successful with
Luke – moved to smaller groups and one-
on-one conferring)
 One-on-one conferring was helpful for Luke
but he still did not put forth maximum
effort.
Luke’s reasoning based on a claim that
Normandy/D-Day was an important event in
history: “Storming Normandy was important
because tons of people were being killed in
Normandy so the Americans saved many lives.
This day gave the Allies the control in the war.
The push was in the Allies’ direction to win the
war. D-Day was one of the deadliest Battles in
the history of the entire world.”
Post-assessment reflection: In his post-
assessment CER, Luke improved his reasoning
score to a 4/6, which is at the proficient level.
His reasoning was far more connected to his
evidence and claim. All of those changes made
his CER more organized, effective and
convincing.
“Pit bulls are responsible for about 64 perfect of
fatal attacks on humans. This shows they are
aggressive and can kill without thinking and
should be banned.”
Intervention: More emphasis on small group
peer discussions and editing helped Luke make
greater progress in his reasoning skills. One-
on-one conferring was also greatly helpful. This
may be because of his attention deficit.
Conversations with colleagues regarding his
learning style were helpful as was a review of
professional resources (PD books, etc.)
Luke’s post-assessment argument writing
shows greater organization, more specific
evidence, and a better understanding of the
use and purpose of reasoning.
 Pre-Assessment Data
Pre-Assessment: All students completed a
common CER pre-assessment in October 2017.
The majority of students scored a 2 or 3 out of 6
on the reasoning portion of their CER, which is
below proficient (4 of 6). At this point, only 5
students had a score 4 or above (proficient) for
their reasoning. We spent some time on claim
and evidence (see below) but focused more and
earlier on reasoning compared to 6th grade.
Because these students are in 8th grade, their
ability to craft a claim was good but not quite
specific enough. Our learning focused on
including reasons in claim statements. Finding
evidence was another focus. Again, because of
their previous experience, they were fairly adept
at finding evidence. My instruction concentrated
on using strong, specific evidence and citing it
effectively.
Intervention strategies after pre-assessment and
before interim-assessment:
 Graphic organizers were utilized to help
students internalize the structure of an essay.
Initially, these organizers were teacher-
created; in the fourth quarter, the organizers
were student-created.
 Mentor texts were utilized to show students
the importance of this work and provide
authentic examples. Every effort was made
to find high-interest articles (“Screen
Addiction is Destroying Travel” – USA Today
 Anchor charts of essay structure and
grammar/sentence structure were constantly
displayed in the classroom.
Data Story
8th Grade Argument Writing
8 Claim
6
4
2 Caption: All students completed a common
0
Claim Evidence Reasoning
Pre Mid Post
Caption: All students improved on their ability to
craft a strong, specific claim and back it up with
cited evidence from texts. The interim assessment
scores for claim and evidence reflect students
learning and being reminded of previous teaching.
Reasoning scores improved less from pre-asmt to
interim asmt because this skill is more difficult;
however, all students improved their scores from
interim to post-assessment.
Intervention strategies added after interim-
assessment and before post-assessment:
 Micro-progressions helped students notice and
use specific strategies to improve their
reasoning skills.
 Small group conferring and one-on-one
conferring was effective with these students.
Grouping was based on student goals and
designed to move student learning ahead at a
faster pace than whole-class instruction alone.
Data Story - % of Students Proficient
% PROFICIENT 8th Pre-Asmt Post-Asmt
28% 100%
Evidence 64% 100%
Reasoning 20% 80%
CER post-assessment in May 2018. All students
improved in their ability to use reasoning to
support their claims. The majority of students
scored in the proficient range (4 out of 6). We
are still learning! As we read The Outsiders
during our last five weeks together, we’ll focus
on that reasoning piece to make even more
improvements – 100% proficient is the goal!
Intervention strategy(ies) added after interim
assessment and before post-assessment:
 Conferring with small groups and individual
students continued as students further
refined their skills. Using student writing
samples in these conferences became more
viable as students developed their
argument writing abilities.
 Reflection using prior argument writing
essays was helpful to further individualize
learning.
Evidence of Student Growth: Bryce Nolan (8th grade student with autism and lower reading comprehension related to his autism)
Pre-assessment reflection: Bryce’s entire pre-
assessment CER is below:
Mr. White is most responsible for the sorrows that came about because of
wishing on the monkey’s paw.
“Mr. White dropped the talisman back in his pocket, and placing chairs,
motioned his friend to the table. In the business of dinner the talisman was
partly forgotten, and afterward the three sat fascinated as they listened to
more of the soldier’s adventures in India.”
This shows that he was responsible for the talisman and kept everyone in
one spot. This is proven that Mr. White is the most responsible for the
sorrows that came about because of wishing on the monkey’s paw.
Although Bryce showed some ability to state a
claim and provide evidence to support it, he was
not able to organize his writing well or use
reasoning for its intended purpose.
Interventions: Bryce made good use of graphic
organizers to understand his evidence. My
colleagues, particularly Ms. Menko and I, revised
Calkins’ checklists and rubrics to make them
more student-friendly. Bryce benefitted from
small group conferring with peers a bit above his
abilities. I frequently spoke with him and Ms.
Burchi for one-on-one conferring during his 6th
hour Achievement Skills class.
Interim- assessment reflection: Our interim
assessment was our research paper, and Bryce
had difficulty initially. (His chosen topic of gay
marriage was one he had strong personal
opinions about, which he frequently inserted
into his paper.)
Interventions:
 Continued use of graphic organizers and
mentor texts helped Bryce picture where
he should be going with his essay/research
paper. At this point, Bryce and other
students are creating their own graphic
organizers and checklists (see below).
 Micro-progressions and conversation about
them helped Bryce pinpoint specific writing
moves he could make to improve his
reasoning (Use a “What if…” statement,
example, etc.)
Post-assessment reflection: In his post-
assessment CER, Bryce improved his reasoning
score to a 5/6, which is at the proficient level.
His reasoning no longer starts with “This shows
that…” and does more than merely restate his
claim statement. In addition, his argument
essay shows greater organization, specific
evidence and citations.
Interventions: Bryce benefitted from continued
small group and one-on-one instruction as well
as teacher collaboration and consultation with
professional resources (books and people).
“Adult should ban books to prevent outcries because
many parents are mad that the schools are having
kids read books with inappropriate content in them.
This is creating public outcry.”
Overall Instruction Related to Student Growth Goal --
Domain 1:

 Possible student misconceptions are taken into account in the order concepts are sequenced and taught (claim first, then evidence, and reasoning
last because it has traditionally been more difficult for students). Interventions whereby student misconceptions are immediately recognized and
dealt with are provided (small group and one-on-one discussions, for example).
 Recent developments in content-related pedagogy are incorporated. Lucy Calkins’ rubrics and checklists were incorporated into instruction to make
learning targets more clear. Micro-progressions came from a conference presentation by Kate Roberts and Maggie Beattie Roberts and subsequent
purchase of their book DIY Literacy.
 Schoology and Excel are utilized to assess students’ skill levels on an ongoing basis and to pinpoint areas of misunderstanding.
 Student learning needs (IEPs, 504s, reading comprehension issues, etc.) are taken into account when student seating charts are made and when small
groups are formed for peer editing and conversation.
 Every effort is made to connect argument writing skills and outcomes to previous learning in 5th grade and earlier in 6th grade. We discuss fifth grade
requirements (“I claim”) and why those change in 6th grade. Mentor texts are helpful in helping students see how these skills are useful and used in
the world outside of school. Mentor texts are found in Lucy Calkins’ work but also in newspapers, Newsela, CNN, etc.
 Differentiation: As students are ready, we discuss loosening the structure of argument writing. Claims can be more than one sentence by more
sophisticated writers; evidence and reasoning can and should be fluidly written to better make arguments clear and persuasive. Small group and
one-on-one conversations aid in this differentiation.
 Schoology houses resources for students, including pictures of micro-progressions, anchor charts from previous units, student examples, mentor
texts, etc.
 Twitter allows us to reach for resources beyond our classroom.
 Students were not permitted choice in topics for our pre- and post-assessments because they are standardized at Larson. However, in other
assignments, choice is incorporated. For example, our research paper was a Scholastic “I Survived” contest, which students voted to participate in.
(Once the vast majority of students voted to participate, all students were required to write to the contest prompt.) Students chose a historical event
or natural disaster that they wanted to learn about. This assignment also allowed students to incorporate their Social Studies learning and resources.
These entries were sent to Lauren Tarshis (author of the “I Survived” series). The assignment was authentic and reached beyond classroom walls.
(Our state pet project is most ‘beyond the walls’ project I have ever done but I make every effort to incorporate authenticity into all assignments.)
 Rubrics are developed in tandem with students and are based on our anchor charts.
 Annotation skills are taught as we read articles related to our topics and as study mentor texts.

Domain 2:

 Student discussions are an important part of learning and understanding. Emphasis is placed on respectful dialogue and critique of others’ ideas.
Seating charts and small groups are constructed so that students can help each other understand articles and course content. Seeing others’ writing
helps students put effort into making their own writing better without being told to do so. Visible thinking strategies and discourse strategies are
 utilized to aid in deeper understanding. As the year progressed, my role in these discussions lessened and students took more ownership of
discussion content and monitoring.
 Our classroom environment changed this year with the addition of tables instead of desks. This arrangement allows for better discussion and pair
sharing. Students take the initiative to move seating around if it helps them develop better conversations.

Domain 3:

 Students feel ownership of their learning and can explain our learning goals. Goals are posted in the classroom each day/each unit and are echoed in
anchor charts displayed in the room.
 Student discussions help bring misconceptions and areas of disagreement to the forefront. Students share their thinking and comment on each
other’s thinking so that we all move deeper in our understanding of the content and its different points of view. I also point out possible areas of
misconception while trying to be encouraged. Although reasoning is difficult for students, they should not feel that it is beyond their abilities!
 Students who more easily understand and demonstrate early understanding of concepts are seated around the room near students who may have
more difficulty so that they can share that deeper understanding.
 At the end of major writing pieces, students reflect on their process and learning. Reflection always includes improvements needed in next writing
projects. These responses are submitted to Schoology and referenced by me and the students as we move on to other writing assignments.
 Formative assessment takes place continually as I move around the classroom to small groups and individual students. Students also monitor their
own understanding by reflection, exit tickets, and conversation with peers.
 Two of my classes this year are co-taught with a special education teacher; however, I reach out to other special education staff and general
education teachers to collaborate. We discuss ways to reach students that have worked in other classes and/or situations.
 Timelines are flexible and based on the level of student understanding. Deadlines are always moveable!