You are on page 1of 25

WTS 1 & 2

Improving Special Education Reading Levels


Ashley Hodge
Saint Marys University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 1 & 2
EDUW 691
Caroline A. Hickethier, Instructor
July 10, 2013

Page 1 of 25

WTS 1 & 2

Page 2 of 25

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors


Wisconsin Teacher Standard 1
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the
discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of
subject matter meaningful for students.
Knowledge. The teacher relates his/her disciplinary knowledge to other subject areas.
Dispositions. The teacher has enthusiasm for the discipline(s) s/he teaches and sees
connections to everyday life.
Performances. The teacher develops and uses curricula that encourage students to see,
question, and interpret ideas from diverse perspectives.

Wisconsin Teacher Standard 2


The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and develop, and
can provide instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.
Knowledge. The teacher understands how learning occurs-how students construct
knowledge, acquire skills, and develop habits of mind-and knows how to use instructional
strategies that promote student learning for a wide range of student abilities.
Dispositions. The teacher appreciates individual variation within each area of
development, shows respect for the diverse talents of all learners, and is committed to help them
develop self-confidence and competence.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 3 of 25

Performances. The teacher accesses students thinking and experiences as a basis for
instructional activities by, for example, encouraging discussion, listening and to group
interaction, and eliciting samples of student thinking orally and in writing.

Danielson Domain
Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy
Component 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students

WTS 1 & 2

Page 4 of 25

Pre-assessments
Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
For Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 1, I want to focus on how can technology be
integrated to create learning experiences that make aspects of subject matter meaningful for
students and by doing so improve students reading comprehension levels. I was recently hired
in a new position as a high school cross-categorical special education teacher. This will be my
first year at a high school; I previously was a middle-school teacher for the past five years. In the
fall, I will teach reading, English, and mathematics to 15 high school students in grades 9
through 12. In my reading class I will have seven students: five are Learning Disabled (LD), and
two are Emotional Behavioral Disabled (EBD). When the school year begins, I will start a unit
on themes of reading, primarily focusing on identity. My main objective for the course will be
to implement effective and exciting technology into my lesson plans to increase my students
reading comprehension levels.
I chose three WTS 1 descriptors that will dictate my instruction. The knowledge
descriptor relates to a teachers disciplinary knowledge to other subject areas. This means that
the most effective curriculum will incorporate not only reading, but it will have bits of English,
mathematics, and possibly more subject areas to round out a top-notch lesson. My curriculum
will include times when students need to problem solve, critically think, collaborate with each
other, and use creativity and communication skills in order to be successful. I believe all of these
are characteristics of effective learning!
The disposition descriptor that best summarizes my state of mind is the teacher has
enthusiasm for the discipline(s) he or she teaches and sees connections to everyday life. This is
my personality exactly, and I believe teachers need to have enthusiasm to learn, in order for the

WTS 1 & 2

Page 5 of 25

students to have that same enthusiasm. I enjoy working with special education students every
day; however, I realize that this is not true for every teacher. My hope is by being passionate in
my position that enthusiasm will rub off onto some of my special education cohorts.
For the performance descriptor, I chose teacher develops and uses curricula that
encourage students to see, question, and interpret ideas from diverse perspectives. In my new
district, every student will be receiving a laptop so I feel the instruction in the classroom should
integrate fresh technology, where kids can interact with reading in innovative ways. Currently
this is a new concept in the special education department. My hope, for the new school year, is to
give advice to my coworkers about what they can do in their own classrooms.
I also chose three WTS 2 descriptors to guide my learning process. I will address, how
children with broad ranges of ability learn and develop and how teachers can provide instruction
that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.
My knowledge descriptor is how to use instructional strategies that promote student
learning for a wide range of student abilities. All of my students have been assessed and are all
at different reading levels. I am certain that integrating technology will not only hit on
everyones different learning styles, but it will also be a nice change from what these students are
used to with their old worksheets and textbooks curriculum. It is thought that special education
students are not capable of completing grade-level work, but that is often untrue. I believe that it
is important to remember that grade-level content may be modified or reduced in difficulty for
students; however, that does not mean that the highest learning standards should be lowered.
For the disposition descriptor for WTS 2, I chose shows respect for the diverse talents of
all learners, and is committed to help them develop self-confidence and competence. When

WTS 1 & 2

Page 6 of 25

working with a large number of students, some get lost in the shuffle of off-task behaviors or
lack of comprehension. It is important to have individual conference times with students to not
only talk about their progress in the classroom, but to also give them confidence they may not
receive elsewhere. Technology can also provide many opportunities for students to show off
their different abilities.
The performance descriptor about accessing students thinking and experiences as a
basis for instructional activities will drive me as I build my curriculum for a technology-filled
reading classroom. In the fall, my class will start with the students completing a Storybook
writing project and presentation, where they will be asked to make an online book and answer
questions regarding their life experiences. My goal is to use this project to get to know the
students more, and I hope for 100% participation.
Assessment of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
My Reading class will be 86 minutes every other day in my special education classroom.
Based on the STAR Reading test, my students have reading levels ranging from grades 3 to 9.
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) will be my standardized learning objective for this
research. Though I teach students in grades 9 through 12, the majority of my students will be
juniors and seniors, so I chose to focus on the Grade 11-12 CCSS. ELA Literacy. RL. 11-12.2.
The standard includes: determine two or more themes or central ideas of a text and analyze their
development over the course of the text.
My first activity for the identity unit will be the personal online Storybook, where
students will need to complete individual presentations to share with the class. After that we will
begin to view cartoons during class. There will also be the opportunity for the students to view
additional cartoons on a class website. I would like to use these online cartoons as a way to build

WTS 1 & 2

Page 7 of 25

a classroom community and as a tool for the students to start analyzing and discussing what they
know about and how they relate to the identity theme.
Artifact A from Cartoon Stock shows one such cartoon which I will cover the voice
bubble and ask the students to write what they think the character might have said. All seven
students will participate in this activity, and I assume the participation will be appropriate. I then
will uncover the voice bubble. After reading the text I will ask the students to write what the
central idea of the illustration was.
Out of the seven students, two high readers will likely have correct answers about how
the character is dealing with an identity crisis, three middle readers may have responses that give
related answers, and the two lowest readers will likely have no completed sentences (only a few
words). We then will continue the lesson by talking about how their initial feelings of the
illustration changed after they analyzed the cartoon harder.
Along with the written response portion of the class, I also want to implement a
comprehension aspect to the identity unit. After the cartoon portion of the class period I will
integrate the book The Cat Who Thought She Was a Dog and the Dog Who Thought He Was a
Cat by Isaac Bashevis Singer. This book is a wonderful representation of how we feel about
ourselves and who we believe we are as individuals. This idea of ourselves can all change when
we look at who we are on the outside with a mirror, and it may also help us look at others
differently.
I will have multiple copies for the students to popcorn read and every student will take
a turn. Most likely there will be no opposition to reading because the kids will be enjoying the
book. After completing the first half of the book together, they will continue to silently read the
remainder of the book. When they complete the book, they will receive a 10-question, multiple-

WTS 1 & 2

Page 8 of 25

choice comprehension worksheet. By reading the beginning out loud, it will most likely set the
students up for better outcomes. I foresee the results being as follows: three middle and high
readers most likely will have 7 of 10 answers correct, one middle reader will score 6 of 10, and
three middle and low readers will score 5 of 10. I usually require them to read entire texts
independently, but I still think this will be a valid pre-assessment.
Taking in account those simple activities and the struggles that the majority of my
students will most likely have, my plan is to revert back to the drawing board. I will start at the
website for the CCSS looking at the grade 11-12 standards, where my objective will be to read
and decipher what areas I really need to focus on to better my classroom. An additional goal is to
add more daily reading exercises in the first minutes of class. My main personal goal parallels
my new high schools goal of integrating technology to improve instruction, and by doing so
improve comprehension levels.
Assessment of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
On a normal day in my classroom, my LD students will usually be very attentive and
ready to learn. Though they may not always be prepared, their focus will quickly shift onto what
I am teaching. My EBD students will be on task 80% of the time, and if they make the choice not
to attend during my class, I will have the opportunity to catch them up during Study Hall.
During Reading class, my higher level readers are more likely to answer any questions
that I may ask; however, my goal is to foster a better learning environment by moving
throughout my seven students and asking questions to determine if everyone understands what is
being taught.
The participation during class also may not be 100% because of a number of off-tasks
behaviors. Throughout my 86-minute class, at least one student will most likely be off task every

WTS 1 & 2

Page 9 of 25

30 minutes. These off-task behaviors can be anything from zoning out, asking for a piece of
material they have forgotten, blurting they need to use the restroom, or even the rare swearing. In
the past, I have averaged three detentions per week, two IV referrals, and one student sent to the
EBD room for a break. Obviously, behaviors have played a huge role in what is being learned
and not being learned during my class.
Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research
The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment
assessment show that my curriculum needs to be filled with technology that will keep my high
school special education students interested enough in the classroom that they stay active during
their learning!
My personal learning goal, stated as an essential question to guide this research, draws it
wording from WTS 1: How can technology be integrated to create learning experiences that
make aspects of subject matter meaningful for students and by doing so improve students
reading comprehension levels?
Research Summary
Technology has slowly changed the face of education; and though it can be daunting at
times to merge technology within curriculum, in the end it can be a useful tool for every student.
The Common Core Essential Elements for English Language Arts (2012) stated, As society and
technology change, so does literacy (p. xx). Using technology in the special education setting
can motivate students to learn in meaningful and interactive ways. This motivation can translate
into more successful learning in the classroom.
According to Enhancing Interdisciplinary Instruction in General and Special Education
by Gardner, Wissick, Schwder, and Canter (2003), technology may allow students to see the

WTS 1 & 2

Page 10 of 25

bigger picture and relate individual skills to other contexts (p. 171). This bigger picture view
will hopefully ensure that students not only graduate from high school and are college and career
ready, but also are prepared to step into the world as feeling and thoughtful members of the
community.
One such way for technology to allow students to see the bigger picture is SameLanguage-Subtitling (SLS), which is a karaoke-style subtitling intervention. In a 2013 article, the
U.S Department of Education explored the validity of SLS used in special education classrooms
and their research found that calculations indicated that students in the SLS intervention
condition scored significantly higher than students in the comparison condition on the reading
comprehension achievement posttest (p. 1).
In this study, 198 secondary students with learning disabilities were split into two equal
groups an intervention condition group and the comparison condition. The intervention
condition group participated in coursework that involved SLS instruction 15 to 20 minutes daily.
The instruction consisted of viewing subtitled multi-media files found on the internet and were
subject area based i.e. Presidential speech, mathematics presentation, scene reenactment from
novel, art museum tour, etc
During the study, the first six weeks the students in the intervention condition began their
class with SLS viewing and response activities online, along with comprehension worksheets
and written response work. For the next six weeks, they spent 90 minutes weekly building their
own subtitled media files. This technique was different than that of the comparison condition
where the instruction method was business as usual. By using subject-appropriate and diverse
SLS content, the possibilities are endless for students to discover and investigate the world

WTS 1 & 2

Page 11 of 25

around them. Implementing critical discussion work and comprehension checks are also essential
for long-lasting results.
Gardner et al. (2003) also agreed with findings of Gardner and Wissick (2002) that, it is
important to consider how the learning will be structured and how much direction and guidance
should be given to a student (p. 162). This is a very important item to consider when developing
technology-based literacy activities. Educators should be literacy learners who can construct
learning environments that encourage individualized problem solving and promote active
learning. These learning environments also need to be vigorous and stimulating to students.
Both Graham and MacArthur (1988) and MacArthur (1996) attributed that, Writing is a
process that is well supported by technology (p. 163). Using a technology-based program can
provide the essential prompts and possibilities to apply higher-level literacy skills in every
students writing. Word processors can make any unit more extensive, and they can often
enhance student motivation to write. This motivation can also be manifested into students who
are more willing to learn about the writing experience. Gardner et al. (2003) also suggested
technology can help teachers place less importance on the formal writing of traditional papers
or reports and more importance on the organization of knowledge that communicates
information in a way that makes sense (p. 166).
Higher reading comprehension levels clearly do not improve just by providing students
one form of a lesson plan. What the brain needs is the ability to receive information and that can
often come from multiple ways of teaching.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 12 of 25

Research Implications
The essential question guiding this research was How can technology be used to
improve students reading comprehension levels? As I move into a new district, my technology
base is not great, but my flexibility to better my curriculum is limitless.
Based on the U.S Department of Education study, Same-Language Subtitling (SLS) is
definitely something I will try to help improve reading comprehension levels. It is only one valid
reading intervention out there, but it is important to stay open and willing to try anything that has
been found to work. That is what I intend to do in my classroom. I am certain that if I try it for
12 weeks, similar to that of the study, that will be a sufficient amount of time to determine the
validity myself.
For this identity unit I was not planning on a Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) time or a
Writers Workshop, which is when I have students read or free write for 30 minutes. But after
thinking back on a past student mentioning that she wanted me to include those into my
instruction, I began to realize the importance of those lessons. I was ecstatic that she wanted to
use her technology as an opportunity to share her thoughts and feelings, along with using
complete sentences! Because of her, I changed my lesson plan to include both SSR time and
Writers Workshops. Both Graham and MacArthur (1988) and MacArthur (1996) attributed that,
Writing is a process that is well supported by technology, so implementing more Writers
Workshop tasks will be an addition I will also make.
Gardner et al. (2003) made it clear that learning needs to be structured and the teacher
should have a clear and concise plan of what is going to happen during the period. I will be
trying to plan my lessons by the minute, and as daunting as that sounds, I have confidence that

WTS 1 & 2

Page 13 of 25

minute-to-minute plans should help with some of the off-task behaviors that I have encountered
during my class.
Research-based Action Plan
Action Plan Summary Outline
1. Design daily Same Language Subtitling (SLS) instruction that will fit into curriculum
in other subject areas. During the 12-week span students will (a) view 15 to 20 minutes worth of
SLS multimedia files daily for the first 6 weeks; and (b) work 90 minutes weekly on their own
SLS multimedia files.
2. Incorporate Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) and Writers Workshop into the curriculum
once a week for 30 minutes. This will have theme objectives and it will be an opportunity for
students to read and write about what they are interested in.
3. Create online Storybook to provide a fun and exciting way for students to construct
sentences and later students will make presentations to classmates about themselves.
4. Assess comprehension levels weekly with www.easycbm.com online tool. This tool is
a program that I can determine what skill and grade level the students will be assessed at. I will
do this between STAR testing (pretest, mid-test six-week, and posttest).
Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
1. Standardized goal: Grade 11-12 Common Core State Standard CCSS. ELA Literacy.
RL. 11-12.2: determine two or more themes or central ideas of a text and analyze their
development over the course of the text.
2. Targeted learning objective: Students will use technology to better comprehend
textual elements.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 14 of 25

Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)


1. Task Objective: Analyze and identify examples of theme and provide an overall
summary for each text, including how the multiple texts interact and build on one another.
2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)
a. Provide a summary of an unfamiliar text
b. Explain how authors choice of words and phrases impact theme
c. Writing Rubric at Grade 11 level, minor errors allowed
Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Quiz using the Accelerated Readers Standardized Test and Assessment in
Reading (STAR) pretest, mid-test (six weeks into), and immediate posttest
(after 12 weeks). Artifact C illustrates how that data will be collected and
reviewed after all three testing times.
2. Assessments on www.easycbm.com will be done weekly between STAR
testing. This online tool lets me choose what skills and at what level every
student is at.
3. Written response questions every two weeks, similar to CCSS design, in
correlation with content.
Post-assessments
Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
Bill Gates once said, Technology is just a tool. In terms of getting the kids
working together and motivating them, the teacher is the most important. So even
though technology can be a useful tool to make students motivated and inspired, the fact
that the teacher is the most important motivation, will be my driving to force that helps

WTS 1 & 2

Page 15 of 25

develop and use curricula that encourage students to see, question, and interpret ideas
from diverse perspectives, as per the WTS 1 performance descriptor.
I started my research looking for instructional techniques that other schools had
tried for integrating technology in not only special education classrooms, but also regular
education classes. Because it will be my first year at this high school and the school
district is so technology driven, I believe initially I may have higher expectations for the
students technology skills. I will begin with the basics like where to find the websites I
have found for them and general computer information. I am assuming I will be surprised
at how in-depth I will need to go in terms of word processing skills and creating
presentations.
During the first few days using the technology-filled curriculum, I will observe more
productive conversations than those that were previously taking place throughout the period. The
children will be more enthusiastic about learning and the instructional strategies that used
technology really promoted WTS 2 knowledge descriptor, student learning for a wide range of
student abilities and truly supported their intellectual, social, and personal development.
In terms of my instruction, in the past a lot of time has been spent with starting a
certain program. The biggest change I want to make is to begin my class with the website
or presentation ready when the kids walk in the door. That will really save time and I
believe behaviors will mostly likely not even have time to begin. Planning for every
minute of class will make the instruction that more effective.
During the Reading class, rather than my normal routine to begin the class, we will
begin with the Same-Language-Subtitling (SLS) and it will be quite easy to relate, WTS 1
knowledge descriptor, disciplinary knowledge to other subject areas. Students will

WTS 1 & 2

Page 16 of 25

participate in an SLS presentation all together and then we will discuss what we have just
heard or read. The discussions, I am sure, will be informative and creative and always
right on task. It also will be so exciting that no one will want to miss those viewings or
discussions, so I rarely will have anyone tardy to class or ask to use the restroom.
Throughout the class period the learning will always seem to keep progressing. I
have the fear that maybe students will revert back to their off-task behaviors when we
transition from SLS to the cartoon activities or book text, but if I keep the lesson plan
flowing from minute-to-minute, I do not think that will be an issue. I have no doubt; the
students will seem more confident and willing to answer questions when we complete the
cartoon activities and Storybook presentations.
I have found it helpful to focus on WTS 2 performance descriptor which states to
use, students thinking and experiences as a basis for instructional activities. To have
instruction that relates to them and their life experiences, will make the learning that much
more effective.
Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
The student learning objective focused on the students determining two or more themes
or central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text. I will first
introduce the identity theme unit with the Cartoon Stock (Article A) and then we will continue
with a few additional cartoons. I will then start reading the book The Cat Who Thought She Was
a Dog and the Dog Who Thought He Was a Cat by Isaac Bashevis Singer, and they will have to
finish the remaining pages.
After that we will delve into The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Sleznick. This book
is leveled between grades 6 to 9; however, it can make for great conversation and can easily be

WTS 1 & 2

Page 17 of 25

infused with technology. Artifact B illustrates the first three days of my lesson plan, including
analysis of the pages 1 to 45, an introduction of the central idea or the book, and an exit ticket
asking them to write about the main theme for the day. After reviewing these exit tickets, I am
hoping to be excited about the progress that will be made.
The exit ticket will ask a variety of comprehension questions and also short answer. This
short assessment will be a good illustration of how much comprehension was taking place
throughout the first 50 pages of the book. Artifact D lays out the review for chapters 1 to 6.
Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)
While implementing my research, the level of participation in the learning environment
will substantially improve. In the past, on average I would have one student every 30 minutes
perform an off-task behavior. After I begin my technology-based unit their hands and mouths
will be busy exploring the internet, writing on a word processor, and preparing presentations. My
overall off-task behaviors will reduce dramatically to having only one student being off-task
once per period (86 minutes).
Prior to the unit, I averaged three detentions per week, two IV referrals, and one student
sent to the EBD room for a break. This will change drastically to having only one detention per
week, zero IV referrals, and one student sent to the EBD room every other week. Obviously, this
will make a tremendous difference in the amount and quality of learning that will take place in
my classroom.
Reflection of Entire Learning Process
The essential question guiding this entry was How to integrate technology and improve
students reading comprehension levels? I have truly embraced this experience as an
opportunity to upgrade and enhance my classroom activities and curriculum. I feel it will be a

WTS 1 & 2

Page 18 of 25

learning experience not only for the kids, but also for me. Sometimes it is hard to get special
education students motivated for learning when they enter the classroom, but I feel that
technology offers that possibility of getting them engaged with new and interesting ways of
learning!
What Worked or Should Work and Why
1. It will work to plan my instruction thoroughly and almost minute-to-minute. I will start
out assuming how long each portion of my lesson will take and I will successfully plan for all 86
minutes of class.
2. Share my learned information and new curriculum with my colleagues. I feel that my
entire special education team will improve because they will see my growth in comprehension
levels, and then if they implement in their rooms they could possibly have similar outcomes. I
look forward to the possibility of the entire department improving!
3. It will work to ask my students for feedback about what we just read for instant reading
recall. If something is not clear to them, I will take the time to reteach with the hopes they will
understand a second time.
What Did Not Work or May Not Work and Why
1. It will not work to have insufficient curriculum, but it does not need to be perfect
either. Daily, I will think I have done my best to perfect the lesson, and I may feel a bit
discouraged if something goes wrong. I need to remember that my instruction does not have to
be perfect, because behaviors do happen, but it is necessary to be flexible and willing to alter the
lesson throughout the hour.
2. Moving too quickly through the instruction will not work for my students. Like
previously stated, I will try to design my lesson plans minute-to-minute; however, at times I will

WTS 1 & 2

Page 19 of 25

need to reteach and that will leave work undone at the end of the period. So staying flexible
during class will be imperative.
My Next Steps
1. Implement this school wide with all special education students and analyze growth
patterns. After I have done this with my students and the results are positive, I hope for the entire
department to move in this direction for the betterment of the students.
2. In class, we will continue with The Invention of Hugo Cabret book with a variety of
technology supports and the students will participate in group work, complete comprehension
questions, and be asked to do writing assignments.
3. We will also continue with the Same-Language-Subtitling instruction, weekly
www.easycbm.com tests, Sustained Silent Reading, Writers Workshops, and STAR assessments.
All these will be done with hopes of improving reading comprehension levels even more.
4. Align more of the CCSS with my technology-based instruction. I think having a good
grasp on what the CCSS are will assist me in making my lesson plans parallel with what the
students will see in the Smarter Balanced Assessment.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 20 of 25

References
Gardner, J. E., Wissick C. A., Schweder W., & Smith-Canter L. (2003). Enhancing
interdisciplinary instruction in general and special education: Thematic units and
technology. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 160-172. doi:
10.1177/07419325030240030501
Gardner, J.E., and Wissick, C.A. (2002). Enhancing thematic units using the world wide web:
Tools and strategies that integrate technology for students with mild disabilities. Journal
of Special Education Technology, 17, 27-38.
Graham, S., and MacArthur, C.A. (1988). Improving learning disabled students skills at revising
essays produced on a word processor. Self instruction strategy training. The Journal of
Special Education, 22, 133-152.
MacArthur, C.A. (1996). Using technology to enhance the writing process of students with
learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 344-354.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse.
(2013). WWC review of the report: Same-Language-Subtitles (SLS): Using subtitled
music video for reading growth, 1-6.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 21 of 25

Artifact A Lesson Plan prior to Research


This will be my starting point for my identity unit. Much consideration will be put into making
my lesson plans technology-based and more successful.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 22 of 25

Artifact B Lesson Plan after Research


This will be how extensive I will make my lesson plans after dong my research. I believe minuteto-minute plans will keep off-task behaviors low and successful learning high!

The Invention of Hugo Cabret Lessons


Day 1
1. Read to the students: A Brief Introduction
2. Students will look through the pictures on pages 1-45.
3. We will then go through the pictures and write a sentence for each one, describing what
we see, pretending we are the author.
4. What predictions do we have about this book after we have looked at the pictures and
read the introduction?
5. Exit Ticket: What can you tell me about the main character Hugo?
Day 2
1. Do a KWL chart about Paris and Train Stations on the board.
2. Today we will divide into three groups to complete a circuit of the following stations.
There will be approximately 6 people in each station.
Station 1: video (Great Cities of Europe, Paris Section, about 8 minutes)
Station 2: flash cards (words found in chapters 1 and 2, words chunked)
Station 3: stories on train stations and books about France
Books from library and also these stories:
The Cats in Krasinski Square by: Karen Hesse
6.
7.
8.

Next Stop Grand Central by Maira Kalman


The Train to Lulus by Elizabeth Fitzgerald Howard
The Sunday Outing by Gloria Jean Pinkney

Train to Somewhere by Eve Bunting


Day 3
1. Hand out KWL charts (a printed copy of yesterdays discussion) to review what we
learned yesterday from our stations.
2. Review our notes from Monday on picture sentences and predictions.
3. I will read pages 46-61 aloud as students follow along.
a. We will also take time to discuss the pictures as we go.
4. Repeat for chapter 2 as well.

WTS 1 & 2

Page 23 of 25

Artifact C Example of how Reading Levels will be Tabulated


This is an illustration of how my students reading levels will be tabulated and shared with the
students and my special education department. Every student will know what letter they are, so
the information will always stay private.

Reading Levels
2013
Mrs. Hodge
Name

PreAssessment

MidAssessment
(6 weeks)

Post-Assessment
(12 weeks)

New Goal

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

STAR

Student A
Student B
Student C
Student D
Student E
Student F
Student G

WTS 1 & 2

Page 24 of 25

Artifact D Example Review Worksheet


This is one example of a review worksheet for chapters 1 to 6 that the students will complete
after reading. This review includes multiple choice, short answer, and fill-in-the-blanks.

The Invention of Hugo Cabret Chapters 1-6 Review


1. What is the name of the little boy (main character) of our story?
_______________ ___________________
2. What city does the story take place?
London

Black River Falls

Paris

3. What country is this city located in?


France

U.S.A.

England

4. What building in the city does Hugo live?


______________

_____________

5. When does this story take place?


2002

1900

1796

6. What did the old man take from Hugo that he threatened to burn?
_________________
7. Which relatives job (who disappeared) does Hugo do at the train station?
_____________
8. What name does the little girl call the old man?
Daddy

Hugo

Grandpa

Papa Georges

9. What did Hugo have in his apartment that his father had been fixing? (Spell it as
best as possible)
_________________

man

10.When Hugo was following the old man, what did they walk through?

WTS 1 & 2
a train station a cemetery

Page 25 of 25

an apartment

11. Where were they walking to?


an apartment a train station a cemetery

12. What season does the first chapters take place?


Spring Fall

Winter Summer

13. Why do you think that? (What hints in the story made you think it was this season?)

14. Who did Hugo see at the old mans house?


the ____________ ____________
15. What job did Hugos father do prior to dying?
toy booth salesman

clock maker station inspector

16. How did Hugos father die?


falling off a cliff

burning in a museum

drowning in the river

Extra Credit
17. What is another name for the mechanical man?
automaton

Hugos toy man

automatic man

18. What do you predict will happen in the next chapters?

You might also like