Team teaching includes a group of tutors working purposely to help the students learn and make them understand. Proficiency level analysis involves setting levels in class to evaluate the ability to understand. Teachers share insights in varied disciplines. The tutors engage students in class discussions that involve single disciplines or interdisciplinary teams. Team teaching enables the evaluation of students’ understanding levels.
Team teaching offers interaction between the learners in different study disciplines. Faculty examines the learner through the proficiency analysis approach developed in the school for each class. Proficiency analysis helps to determine the understanding level and improve sharing ability among the students (Roberts & Melinda, 34). Many learning institutions encourage proficiency analysis among students to help them develop good strategies for specific education programs. In this paper, we seek to explore the proficiency level in Ms. Jensen’s 7th-grade class AZZELLA scores class at Grand Canyon University.
This paper ought to categorize the seventh-grade class into their appropriate groups depending on individuals’ proficiency levels. The class has four English proficiency levels. The categorical levels include Proficient, Intermediate, Basic, and Emergent. Ms. Jensen groups her learners on varied English labels, such as reading labels, writing labels, listening labels, and speaking labels. When we evaluate the score results of the Arizona English Language Learners Assessment (AZELLA), the student’s level of proficiency will be placed into specific groups. The grouping targets placing the higher-level students with ELL students during class events. The categorization ought to assist the learners in excelling in their studies during classroom discussions.
When examining the class roster, it is identifiable that Jerry is intermediate. Jerry’s performance across all the labels shows that he can work efficiently in the intermediate league with students with a similar level of understanding. In the analysis, I would consider placing all the students under the intermediate level in the same category to develop each other in the English lesson. Michael is intermediate and proficient in writing labels and reading labels. Such results classify him as proficient. The categorizations show that he can pick and develop faster writing and read labels very well.
Aryanna showed proficiency in the reading label, intermediate in the writing label, intermediate in the listening label, and proficiency in the speaking label. Aryanna and Michael can be classified in the same category to ensure mutual benefits among the two. Suzanne and Gabriel can also fit in Michael’s group because they show intermediate and proficiency levels in writing label and speaking labels. Carlos owns intermediate reading and speaking labels and basic writing and listening labels. The categorization matches that of Jade. The two students can perform better when placed in the same group for better development. Desiree fits well in the group because he owns related levels of expertise in the stated labels.
It is possible for students to explain things to other students better than a tutor. Research done by Hakuta et al. 69 shows that students learn from each other faster than from the tutor, especially when they explain things in their own words. Positive interdependence results when individuals of related proficiency levels work together. Ms. Jensen can pair the students in groups according to their likeability or even cross-ability. The grouping technique helps to improve collaboration skills and interpersonal skills. Such skills can be learned from the learning activities unlike during individualized studying.
Cross-ability involves grouping students of varying proficiency levels. Those with high proficiency levels share knowledge with those with low proficiency levels. Ms. Jensen’s class hosts fifteen learners, and as a result, the high-level learners can assist the low-level students during their study sessions. Ms. Jensen can create five groups comprising three students each. In such a case, the first group would comprise Aryanna, Ramon, and Carlos. On the other hand, the second unit ought to involve Gabriel, Jerry, and Hailey. Thirdly, Corynn Michael and Desiree would form the third group. Jacob, Suzanne, and Noah ought to form the fourth group, while the last group consists of Jade, Petie, and low-level learners.
The categorization will consist of students at low levels (Emergent) and basic levels in the presence of proficient-level students. Such categorization helps to develop the learners and ease the work of the tutor. When discussing during class sessions, the proficient and the intermediate learners help the lower-level student improve their grades. The understanding of the assignment and the class participation increase. Learners comprehend the lessons by offering additional support across reading, listening, speaking, and writing labels (Murphy, Karen, et al. 96). The high-level students ought to provide extra assistance to Grand Canyon University.
The tutor should model the assignment first and provide the appropriate guide to the learners. Most teachers walk around the class checking the practicability of the guiding exercise. Creating small groups of three students works better because the participants would understand better when the expert student explains the concepts. Students working in sizable groups help to focus on the exploitation of potential among the different students.
Work Cited
Roberts, Melinda. “Teaching in the multilevel classroom.” New York: Pearson Education. Retrieved July 12 (2007): 2016.
Hakuta, Kenji, Yuko Goto Butler, and Daria Witt. “How Long Does It Take English Learners To Attain Proficiency?.” (2000).
Murphy, P. Karen, et al. “Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis.” Journal of Educational Psychology 101.3 (2009): 740.
