Missouri Collaborative Work Spring 2014 | Page 25

Learning Objectives  Understanding the research and core components of spaced versus massed practice.  Determining the types of concepts which best fit spaced practice.  Determining the amount of space between repetition or practice of concepts.  Applying spaced practice to identified concepts.  Planning for classroom application. Practice Profile Missouri Collaborative Work Practice Profile Foundations present in the implementation of each essential function: Commitment to the success of all students and to improving the quality of instruction. S pac e d v s Ma s sed Prac t ic e P ro file Essential Function Exemplary proficiency Ideal Implementation Proficient Close to Proficient (Skill is emerging, but not yet to ideal proficiency. Coaching is recommended.) Far from Proficient (Follow-up professional development and coaching is critical.) Educator provides repeated instruction and distributes 1 practice of a skill/concept over extended period of time. Educator plans for and provides instruction and practice in a repeated fashion consistently spaced over time. Educator consistently plans for instruction and practice in a repeated fashion consistently spaced over time. Educator varies instruction, examples, models, and 2 context of concept and/or skill allowing for distributed study. Educator provides at least 3 varying repetitions for each concept. Educator provides at least 2 varying repetitions for each concept. Educator provides at least 1 varying repetition for each concept No varying repetition for concepts/skills is provided. Educator consistently plans for and tracks spacing of concepts/skills. Educator consistently plans to track spacing of concepts/ skills as indicated in lesson plans. Educator does not track spacing of concepts/skills. Educator self-monitoring pacing of repeated 3 instruction and intervals between practices. Instruction and practice are not spaced over time. *Evidence: Fidelity Checklist, Student Data 25