InTASC Standard 1: Learner Development
Name of Artifact: Episode 1 (Chapter 10): Backward-Designed Differentiated Lesson
Course: WL 561 – Teaching Second Languages: Theory into Practice
Date: Summer 2025
TESOL Professional Teaching Standards 3.a., 3.b., 3.c., and 4.c. addressed
PreK–12 English Language Proficiency Standard(s) Addressed
TESOL Standard 1: Students communicate for social, intercultural, and instructional purposes within the school setting.
Rationale
I selected this artifact from WL 561 – Teaching Second Languages: Theory into Practice, a course I took in Summer 2025. Developing this lesson helped me better understand how learning objectives, assessment, and instruction work together to support student learning. Shrum and Glisan (2016) describe backward design as a three-stage process. In Stage 1, teachers “identify the end results of instruction in terms of what students should know, understand, and be able to do” (p. 90). In Stage 2, teachers “determine the evidence that will confirm that the end results have been met” (p. 90). The authors further explain that “this evidence is gathered through a variety of formal and informal assessments, not through a single end-of-teaching test or culminating task” (p. 90). Drawing on Wiggins and McTighe’s (2005) backward-design model, Shrum and Glisan (2016) explain that, in Stage 3, teachers “plan learning experiences and instruction that students will need to achieve the desired results—that is, unit and daily lesson plans, selection/design of resource materials” (p. 90).
I followed Stage 1 by identifying what students should know, understand, and be able to do in the healthy-habits lesson. Students would learn vocabulary related to hygiene, food, sleep, and daily routines and use the present simple to describe routines, ask and answer simple questions, and write basic texts. I followed Stage 2 by including several forms of assessment evidence. Students would create a visual routine chart, role-play a conversation, give a short presentation, complete a vocabulary quiz and audio-comprehension activity, and submit an exit ticket. For Stage 3, I used the WHERETO framework (Where, Hook, Equip, Rethink, Evaluate, Tailor, and Organize) to plan the learning experiences and instruction. The lesson begins with a short video or images about healthy habits and a partner discussion about morning routines. Students then learn vocabulary through realia, images, and physical modeling, put daily routine steps in order, and write about two healthy things they do and one they want to start doing. The lesson is tailored to sixth-grade English learners at the A2/Emerging level and includes differentiated activities that reflect their learning styles. It first provides students with language input and then guides them through structured speaking and writing activities.
This artifact aligns with InTASC Standard 1 because I designed the lesson for sixth-grade English learners at the A2/Emerging level. The learning goals are appropriate for this group. Students explore a familiar topic that relates to their own lives while learning to use the simple present tense to describe their daily routines, ask and answer simple questions, and write short texts. I also considered differences within the class by including visual, auditory, hands-on, individual, partner, and group activities instead of relying on a single type of activity. Although students work with the content in different ways, they are all expected to reach the same goals. Each learner must create a visual routine chart, take part in a role-play, and give a short presentation about a healthy habit. Therefore, the lesson accommodates differences in how students learn while maintaining the same expectations for what all students should know and be able to do.
Reference
Shrum, J. L., & Glisan, E. W. (2016). Teacher's handbook: Contextualized language instruction (5th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Artifact #2
Name of Artifact 2: Language Teacher History
Course: WL 561 – Teaching Second Languages: Theory into Practice
Date: Summer 2025
TESOL Professional Teaching Standard(s) Addressed
Standard 2.a. Candidates demonstrate knowledge of how academic, personal, familial, cultural, social, and sociopolitical contexts affect the education of English learners.
Standard 2.e. Candidates identify and describe how their identity, role, cultural understandings, and personal biases influence their interpretation of the strengths and needs of English learners.
PreK–12 English Language Proficiency Standard(s) Addressed
Standard 1: English language learners communicate for social, intercultural, and instructional purposes within the school setting.
Rationale
I selected this artifact from WL 561 – Teaching Second Languages: Theory into Practice, a course I took in Summer 2025. Writing my language teacher history allowed me to reflect on how my experience learning English has shaped my understanding of the challenges English learners face today, including limited vocabulary, difficulties communicating with people in English, and fear of making mistakes.
When I was a beginner ESL student, I had difficulty understanding what my teacher was saying, so I relied on visual aids and nonverbal cues, such as gestures, pictures, and charts, to follow the lessons. Brown and Lee (2025) describe language learning as “multidimensional, shaped by cognitive, emotional, and social factors” (p. 10). As my English improved, I became more comfortable speaking with my teachers and classmates.
My own experience learning English has influenced how I work with multilingual students at Seattle Public Schools. I support middle and high school English learners who have different levels of English proficiency and educational experiences. Through this work, I have come to recognize that students' language development is influenced not only by their individual abilities but also by their learning environments and interactions with others. This connects to Sociocultural Theory. Gass et al. (2025) state that “the theory seeks to understand learning and development and takes as a basic assumption that factors internal to the learner and those external to the learner are not separate at any point of learning” (p. 151).
These differences also make me think about the kinds of support teachers need to provide to English learners to help them understand language concepts. One of the ways that teachers can help them learn these concepts is through scaffolding. Brown and Lee (2025) describe scaffolding as temporary support that enables learners to complete tasks or understand concepts just beyond their current level of competence, with that support gradually removed as their abilities develop (p. 204). I see the importance of scaffolding for English learners because I remember needing that kind of support myself when I was learning English. There were times when I understood very little of what my ESL teachers said in class. What helped me was when they used visuals, such as pictures that matched new words, repeated directions for me, or explained the meaning of a word or idea in a different way. As my English improved, I gradually needed less of that support.
In my current role, I use similar strategies when I need to clarify something or explain an idea to my ML students in a clear and simple way that they can understand. I believe this artifact aligns with InTASC Standard 1 because my Language Teacher History assignment shows how my own English skills have developed over time. Learning another language has taught me that we all learn differently and need different kinds of support during the learning process.
References
Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2025). Principles of language learning and teaching: A course in second language acquisition (7th ed.). Routledge.
Gass, S. M., Behney, J., Plonsky, L., & Huntley, E. (2025). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (6th ed.). Routledge.