Running head: Domain B Review

Review of Portfolio Artifacts for Domain B

Michael Wigglesworth

National University

May 20, 2018

MAT 690 Capstone

Instructor: Michelle Pengilly Ed.D.

 !2
Domain B Review

Abstract

The following paper discusses the artifacts submitted for Domain B for my Professional

Development Quest Portfolio. The artifacts include responses to BTSA interview questions, a

document analyzing summative assessment data, and a sample writing assignment for AP

Government and Politics.

Domain B - Artifact Analysis

Domain B for the California Teaching Performance Expectations addresses the objective

of monitoring student learning during instruction and interpretation and use of assessments. The

first artifact that I’ve included is a series of responses to year 2 BTSA interview questions

pertaining to my AP Government class. In this document I evaluate the progress of a small group

of focus students while examining the effectiveness of my teaching strategies and alignment of

formative and summative assessments. In this interview I explore the effectiveness of several of

my unit projects as a mode of formative assessment. Formative norm-referenced assessments are

important for periodically determining how well students are doing with the subject matter in

relation to one another. These are sometimes referred to as “diagnostic tests” (Slavin, 453).

However, a teacher must go beyond simply carrying out the test, they must spend the time

evaluating the outcomes so as to carry out midcourse adjustments in order to accommodate

student needs and prepare students for summative evaluations (Slavin, 506). This artifact also

demonstrates my efforts to track student progress over the course of the semester. I outlined
 !3
Domain B Review

specific growth areas for the focus students and devised potential modifications that could be

implemented for increased engagement in the future.

The 2nd artifact that I included is an analysis of summative assessment data for my AP

Government and Politics course. Again, this document shows the process by which I use

assessment data to guide instruction. It includes an evaluation of student accommodations and

instructional strategies to determine the impacts on student learning as evidenced by the exam

data and student performance trends. This artifact demonstrates the specific process by which I

analyze summative assessment data. I begin by organizing students into performance bands. I

then evaluate a variety of criteria to better understand why some students failed to meet the

standards (i.e. were appropriate accommodations made, was prerequisite knowledge met, and

were instructional strategies effective). I conclude my analysis by brainstorming ways to modify

instructional strategies and better align the curriculum with assessment.

The 3rd artifact is a sample Free Response Question (FRQ) and grading rubric that I have

adapted from the College Board AP resources for American Government. These FRQs are useful

for both formative and summative assessments. In order to effectively assess a student’s mastery

of the subject matter (beyond understanding basic definitions of words) they need to demonstrate

“communicative competence” and actually use and adapt the vocabulary in various contexts

(Ventriglia p.28, 2012). The FRQs are specifically designed to require students to make

connections between different, seemingly unrelated aspects of the curriculum, as a means to

evaluate a student's depth of understanding. For formative assessment I have students respond to

the FRQs in class. I give them specific strategies for brainstorming and organizing their
 !4
Domain B Review

responses. After they write we discuss the question as a class and evaluate the College Board

rubric. I project a student sample on the board and take students through a scoring. Students then

get into groups of 3-4 and round robin score each others FRQ. Discrepancies in scores are then

discussed by the group as a whole. Not only does this train students to understand the precise

standards by which they are being evaluated but it also provides me the teacher with a concrete

evaluation of student progress. Another FRQ is given on the summative unit exams. These are

formally scored and returned to students to be thoroughly reviewed / discussed. As a result of

these methods I have been able to guide my students to a 90%+ pass rate on the AP exam.
 !5
Domain B Review

References

Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Boston,

MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Ventriglia, L. (2012). Best Practices Interdisciplinary Vocabulary Development. Younglight

Educate, United States.