INTASC Principles

 

McDaniel College requires that all teacher candidates seeking initial certification successfully complete an exit portfolio, based on the INTASC (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium) principles. These principles include the knowledge, dispositions and performances that are essential for all beginning teachers.    Skim read the INTASC principles listed on pages 14- 33 in the Model Standards for Beginning Teacher Licensing, Assessment and Development guide on the website below.   Your portfolio will consist of your resume, philosophy of education, site descriptions, table of contents, 2 artifacts for each INTASC principle and a rationale statement per artifact.   

 

 

 

Beginning Teacher Standards-  http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/correstrd.pdf

 

Here is an example of an artifact and rationale statement from a recent graduate.   She highlighted specific parts of her artifact that give support to her principle connection.   .  

 

INTASC Principle #8:  The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social and physical development of the learner.  Excerpt from Artifact #2:  Case Study

 

Qualitative Reading Inventory III:  Analysis

 

          John Doe a fifth-grade student had been identified as a struggling reader for grade level texts.  His teacher mentioned that he has difficulty constructing meaning when reading struggles when he is asked to summarize a text.  John Doe, himself, feels that he is “kinda” good at reading and that he would like to improve.  He stated that he does not like to read at home and that he would rather play outside than sit inside and read a story.  When he does read, he loves to read about animals, especially dogs.  John Doe would like to work on his spelling, because he feels that in order to become a better reader and writer, he must become a better speller. 

          Initially John Doe was tested with the fifth-grade word list.  He automatically scored within the instructional level, at a 70 percent.  Although this is a low instructional level, John Doe made common miscues for unknown words.  When analyzing the miscues he had made, it was apparent that John Doe was able to recognize and provide the beginning sound for each word, such as threten for threatened.  For most of the unknown words he was also able to provide an ending sound, as seen in reading, pollition for pollution.  The middle sounds are what generally give him the most difficulty when solving for an unknown word. 

Since John Doe scored within the instructional range for the level-five word list, I administered the level-five graded passage was used for analysis.  The passage selected was The Octopus, an expository piece.  This passage was selected because it was about an animal, a topic that would interest the student.  Once John Doe completed the reading, he did once again, score within the instructional range on the level-five reading passage.

          A review of John Doe’s miscues indicated that he substitutes words that have initial graphic similarity to the text word.  After making the miscue he read on.  Once he realized that the miscue did not make sense, he re-read the sentence, self-correcting the miscue.  His miscues were often initially similar to the textual word, as seen in him reading the for this and that, as well as when he read fighting for frightened.  When making a miscue, John Doe was able to self-correct about half of the time.  When he did not self-correct, the uncorrected miscue was usually semantically unacceptable.  John Doe read, first, when fighting, the octopus can push water from its body on a powerful stream.  The sentence should have read:  First, when frightened, the octopus can push water from its body in a powerful stream.  Both of the miscues, fighting for frightened and on for in, change the author’s original meaning in the text and therefore, are not semantically acceptable.

          The student demonstrated visual cues when initially solving for an unknown word. 

 

Rational Statement:

Description of the Artifact:

          I implemented the Qualitative Reading Inventory-III (QRI III) with a struggling fifth-grade reader at Elmer Wolfe Elementary School.  The QRI-III was administered as part of a course EDU 4205:  Assessment for Reading Instruction for Dr. Sharon Craig.  The assessment consisted of graded word lists and leveled passages which assessed the student’s word recognition, prior knowledge, processing strategies and implicit and explicit comprehension.  An analysis of the results revealed which text levels were independent, instructional and frustration, as well as helped identify strengths and areas of growth in reading.  The QRI-III can be used to determine a student’s word solving strategies and cue use, along with the appropriate text level for reading instruction. 

 

Connection to the Artifact and to the INTASC Principle:

          This artifact shows evidence of INTASC Principle #8, which states:  The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social and physical development of the learner.  This particular standard shows that I know how to select and construct assessment strategies and instruments to diagnose students’ literacy abilities and to plan for meeting the needs of my case study student.  By using the graded word lists I was able to determine which leveled passage would be at the instructional level for my student.  I was able to use the leveled passages to determine my student’s word solving strategies, as well as his implicit and explicit comprehension of the text.  I used the information I derived from the assessment to develop lessons to identify my student’s strengths, as well as promote my student’s areas of growth.  By using ongoing assessments I have been able to monitor and document the academic growth of my case study student. 

 

Self-reflection:

          After implementing the QRI-III, I was able to assess my student’s strengths and areas for growth in reading.  The assessment provided an opportunity to analyze my student’s difficulties with comprehension.  I felt very confident in administering the QRI-III, although it was somewhat difficult to administer because the student would respond faster than my pencil could move.  I found the QRI-III very useful when I planned my lessons.  The assessment helped me to find an instructional level text for my student and provided me with many areas of growth for which I could focus my lessons on.  The student seemed to enjoy the assessment because he liked reading about animals and he retained a great deal of information about the article for his retelling.  The student was able to pay full attention to the assessment, because it did not take very long to administer.  After analyzing the assessment, I realize that the student uses visual cues to solve for unknown words when reading, and experiences difficulty in comprehending implicit questions.  I plan to use the QRI-III to determine the reading levels of future students, as well as assess their strengths and their areas of growth.  

 

Using the teaching artifacts that you have collected, choose one artifact and match it to the appropriate principle.  Next write a rationale statement to support your understanding of the principle following these guidelines. 

 

1.             Description of the artifact: Answer who, what, when, where, why and how.

 

 

 

 

 

2.             Connection to the principle:  Clearly state how the artifact connects to the principle.  The narrative should explicitly show your understanding of the principle.

 

 

 

 

 

3.             Reflection:

a.  What did you learn about the students? 

 

 

 

 

b.             What did you learn about teaching?

 

 

 

 

c.  What will you do differently or continue doing in the future?  

 

Back to index page