Artifact+1+90-90-90+Study

= Artifact 1: 90-90-90 Study Response (TE 816) =



Program Standards: 1, 3, 4 Program Goals: 1, 2

Prior to my internship year, I participated in a study abroad program in South Africa in which I spent 4 weeks observing and teaching in a rural high school. During the first week of the program, I had to read the 90-90-90 study and write a response to it. The 90-90-90 study looked at schools that had 90% minority, 90% free or reduced lunch, and 90% of their students achieving at high levels. The report I read discussed the common characteristics shared by schools from across the nation that fit this criteria. This piece describes my general reaction to the 90-90-90 study and then looks at the traits the school where I was placed shares with the schools from the study.

Reading this study and applying it to a South African school really helped to open my eyes about the success that all students, regardless of ethnicity or income level, can achieve (standard 1). Before writing this piece, I had thought I believed that all students could achieve at high levels. However, I was too quick to accept that issues like poverty act as an excuse to explain low achievement. This study and my reaction to it began to challenge me to really accept the capacity for success from all students, regardless of any external forces.

This piece also helped me look at a school as a series of institutional and organizational decision (standards 3 and 4, goals 1, 2). Since the study provided a prototype of what a school that accomplishes this feat looks like, it gave me a lens with which to look at and analyze the structures I saw in this school. I was able to look critically at the decisions my host teacher made and that the school made and evaluate them against documented successful practices. This allowed me to take ideas like making sure students provided written explanation by showing their work and providing frequent feedback that I thought effective and confirming that the research supported this. Seeing these techniques and knowing that they were backed by data, gave me more tools with which to improve my own teaching.

Not only did the piece help me evaluate pedagogy that I observed, it also helped me see what might be missing. I have found that when reflecting on my own practice, I am often more focused on seeing what that teacher does that I can apply in my own classroom, especially in the earliest stages in my career. Just as focusing on what is present can add tools, identifying traits that are absent can help identify areas for growth. In this way, I was able to see the importance of having communication between teachers and having a plan for improvement.

By reading this study and having to apply it to a field experience early in my career, I gained an understanding that I had to evaluate the things I saw different teachers do. Prior to this, I, when observing another teacher, I would merely look for things that I thought I could do effectively. I rarely, if ever, took a step back and asked if that activity actually helped student achievement. After this experience I knew I had to look at the activity critically. Further, once I started teaching my own classes, I knew to use student achievement as a criteria evaluate my own pedagogy as I reflected on my lessons.

Table of Contents Artifact Summary and Evidence. Artifact 2