http://thesecondprinciple.com/teaching-essentials/models-of-teaching/madeline-hunter-lesson-plan-model/
Friday, March 10, 2017
Lesson Plan Analysis: "Litter Poem"
Rachel Shaw
Dr. Jon Mueller
PSY 205
9 March 2017
Lesson Plan Analysis: “Litter Poem”
Children thrive on interactive learning that engages them in a manner that not only allows them to have choices in their learning, but to have the ability to create personal meaning or understanding for the concepts they are learning. In this lesson plan, students are constantly learning in a collaborative manner with their peers as they are exposed to a poem about littering. The lesson is setup in a structured, but flexible manner where students have opportunities as a class and in small groups to discuss their thoughts and opinions about the topic (litter). The lesson plan allowed the teacher to serve as a facilitator (guide) throughout the “tasks” students were to complete as they learned about the main concept. By the end of the lesson, students were to take full charge of their own learning and write their own verse to an anti-litter poem.
The opening activity set the tone for the topic to be introduced that day and readied students for learning. The teacher placed the vocabulary word “litter” on the board and asked students to listen to first three lines of a poem while they generate answers to four questions in groups of three to four students. Students would then share answers and ideas while the teacher displayed them on the board. The opener included an auditory, kinesthetic, and visual component that spotlighted student generated ideas about the topic. Piaget and Vygotsky did not see eye to eye on majority of their research and theories but they both agreed that it is important for children to have collaboration with others while learning. This activity definitely gave an opportunity for students to collaborate with one another and develop ideas before returning to a full classroom setting. The only thing I might change in the introduction of the lesson is allowing the students to first complete the opening activity individually so that they have time to generate ideas on their own. I have worked in groups where some strong personalities have taken over the whole conversation and shyer students were not able to form their own ideas before being told them by another student. Since there were other opportunities for group work planned, I might use a Think, Pair, Share format.
Little to no instruction is given at the very beginning of the lesson. Instead, students are pulled into the lesson by listening to only the first three lines of the poem on an audio track, then they are asked to use forced retrieval of any prior knowledge they may have had about litter. Solely listening to the poem first, then writing examples of what litter is on the board would have effectively created mental pictures for the students to refer back to as the poem was listened to aloud. Deductive learning was utilized when the instructor gave the students the defining attributes of what litter is and then reinforced the rules with worksheets that showed positive examples of what litter is. This part of the lesson was very crucial because it would have clearly defined what litter was for any students that may not have known, or created reinforcement of old knowledge for any students who had already possessed this prior knowledge. I think that the instructor should have used inductive learning to expose the students to the concept of litter. By giving them positive and negative examples of litter, the students would be forced to think and discover what the defining attributes of it were. Little to no thought is involved when the student is outright given the answer. It cuts down the probability of that student retaining the material.
After the opening activity, the teacher planned four tasks (learning activities) that varied in length from 5 minutes to 20 minutes. The attention span of students lasts about 15-25 minutes depending on the subject, so it was a good idea to plan several short activities to keep the students focused and engaged in the material. According to the Cue theory we forget things because we did not have enough associations attached to it. By having several learning activities that varied in length, it kept the students engaged and increased the chance that the student would create quality associations with the material through any or all of the activities.
Group work was utilized at several points in the lesson in order to create personal associations or relevance with the material as well as connect peers together. This is important because students are more likely to be engaged in material that is relevant to them and that they can make a personal connection to. Working in groups would allow students to generate more ideas about the topic than if working individually. Working in groups also allows students to build off each other’s thoughts and ideas and make a personal connection with each other. For example, one group activity in the lesson allowed students to make a personal connection when they were asked to write down their answers to discussion question “Where is the litter problem very bad near your school or home?” By asking students to recall times in their own lives where they have seen litter, it opened up discussion between peers and allowed them to share their similar and different experiences. This makes them personally realize or notice their surroundings more and they may connect with another student in the class who lives nearby too.
The formal operational stage of Piaget's theory of cognitive development allows children age eleven into adulthood to use abstract thought and comprehend hypothetical situations. It also allows for thinking abstractly about language. The students in this lesson have to think abstractly about the diction of the poem and how it affects the overall meaning of the poem before they are able to construct their own verse of it later. The overall lesson plan also allows ample time for students to share personal experiences and or interactions with the surrounding environment as part of the learning process, which is an emphasis with Piaget’s theory.
The students are given the definitions of some key terms on a worksheet to help guide them through the poem as they utilize the learning techniques of rereading and underlining/highlighting. Underlining/highlighting can be called a low utility when used improperly, but when used correctly, both of the learning techniques are used in a way that is beneficial to students. Having them reread the poem several times and search for the key words themselves, instead of giving them the answer, strengthens their ability to retrieve that information later. They had to struggle to find it; it was not just given to them. The lesson takes place over a 60-90 minute period, which allows more than the 30 minutes it takes to effectively store information. This means the students will be more likely to absorb more of the information and be able to recall it later.
Throughout the lesson, maintenance rehearsal occurs through the use of repetition. As students work through the lesson’s activities they will have listened to the poem on an audio track, reread the poem several times on their own, and also read it aloud within groups. In addition to that type of direct repetition, the lesson also called for students to have the opportunity to discuss the information about litter that they had just learned in various group activities. The group discussion questions guided the students to break down the information that was already presented to them by the instructor and forced them to be able to elaborate on the material they learned in their own words. By utilizing the utility tool of summarizing and paraphrasing in order to answer the group discussion questions, the students would ultimately end up creating deeper associations and understandings of the topic of the poem. Maintenance rehearsal was used effectively in these cases because students would be able formulate answers to the questions but also be able to explain their answers to their peers through using their own words. They will then associate their deeper meanings of the poem with specific parts of the poem they were asked to reread and analyze. These skills helped strengthen the student’s ability to create his or her own special meaning in their own litter poem verse they create at the end of the lesson.
As a class, their instructor teaches the students how to clap out the rhythm to the poem as they simultaneously read the words. Modeling is used here in order for the students to see how the task should be completed. The material is reinforced when the students break into small groups and practice clapping out the rhythm of the poem themselves while having kids in their group each try their hand at reading the words along with it. The students are actively engaged with one another, as each student has to reread the poem out loud to the rhythm being clapped out for them. Ultimately, they will end up hearing or rereading the poem several times over but probably will not even realize that they are learning because they will be so engaged in the activity.
Elaborative rehearsal is seen as one of the more effective ways of storing information into long-term memory, and it is utilized throughout this whole lesson. Students have several points where they are able to connect visual associations to the imagery the words in the poem create. It teaches the students to problem solve and use context clues to be able to define the words. They would associate the picture that they saw when reading the imagery with the word that evoked the imagery. Attempting to form mental images of text materials while reading or listening is using the learning technique imagery for text. This technique can strengthen a learner’s ability to retain information because it allows them to attach meaning to the visuals they are associating with what they are learning. The brain loves imagery, and images make it much easier to store a lot of information in one-picture verse trying to make the students recite the important vocabulary words. It also allows them to create chunks or a meaningful unit of information of the material to be able to group with other schemas later.
As far as scaffolding goes, this lesson tried to use several instructional techniques in order to break down the framework of the poetry lesson into parts for the students. As the lesson reached the ending assessment, the students should have been able to build on all the broken down parts of the lesson in order to create their own verse of the poem. This was done in order to meet the lesson objective of introducing students to the concept of litter through poetry. For example, the lesson plan calls for students to work in groups and share their own personal experiences or knowledge about litter. The supporting materials used with the lesson included visual aids such as a graphic organizer and a picture of litter flowing down a hill towards a stream. Poetry was used to symbolize litter and the effects on the environment.
The scaffolding used in the sense of breaking down the concept of litter was very effective. Every activity built on the concept of what litter was and broke it down for the students to create a deeper understanding for it through individual worksheet activities and interactive group activities. However, where this lesson fell short in terms of scaffolding was being able to break down the poetry concepts along with the litter concepts. The objective wanted to introduce students to the concept of litter through poetry and it did achieve that. What the lesson needed to also include was breaking down the framework of what poetry is. There were explanations about the rhythm of a poem, but not what important aspects of a poem are and how to construct one. It relied heavily on the students having to rely on previous knowledge of poetry in order to understand this lesson.
The last part of the lesson forces the students to retrieve all the information they learned in order to write their own verse of the litter poem. It is a version of giving them a practice test to evaluate if they fully understood the material and how to correctly apply it. This type of task is an authentic product task. After creating their own verse to the poem, students present their different verses and explain in detail about why they made the choices they did while writing. It allows the teacher to assess whether the students can construct a substantial, tangible product showing their understanding and mastery of the concepts or not. This summative assessment method is an effective way to test if students took away from the lesson what the objectives wanted them to.
This lesson plan was very consistent in providing support for students as they were learning and figuring out how to interpret and apply the different aspects of poetry. It coincided with a mixture of the collaborative learning guidelines that Piaget and Vygotsky supported for growth and learning and created a motivating stimulating environment for the students to work in. The lesson used several short activities throughout the class period to motivate the learners and keep them engaged until the very end. At the end a culminating activity allowed students to create a personal verse for the poem to be displayed around the school as part of their own anti-litter campaign. This was a good authentic assessment tool to wrap up the ending of the lesson plan. It brought the material full circle by having the students apply the knowledge they learned in the lesson along with their prior knowledge of poetry to create their own verse for the poem. It also gave the students a chance to show off their creative abilities and have a chance to choose what they wanted to write. However, this lesson plan did rely heavily on students already being exposed to poetry and understanding the basic foundations of how to write it. Any students who did not understand poetry well may have been confused or not motivated on how to write their own verse at the end.
https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/Litter%20poem%20Lesson%20plan.pdf
Dr. Jon Mueller
PSY 205
9 March 2017
Lesson Plan Analysis: “Litter Poem”
Children thrive on interactive learning that engages them in a manner that not only allows them to have choices in their learning, but to have the ability to create personal meaning or understanding for the concepts they are learning. In this lesson plan, students are constantly learning in a collaborative manner with their peers as they are exposed to a poem about littering. The lesson is setup in a structured, but flexible manner where students have opportunities as a class and in small groups to discuss their thoughts and opinions about the topic (litter). The lesson plan allowed the teacher to serve as a facilitator (guide) throughout the “tasks” students were to complete as they learned about the main concept. By the end of the lesson, students were to take full charge of their own learning and write their own verse to an anti-litter poem.
The opening activity set the tone for the topic to be introduced that day and readied students for learning. The teacher placed the vocabulary word “litter” on the board and asked students to listen to first three lines of a poem while they generate answers to four questions in groups of three to four students. Students would then share answers and ideas while the teacher displayed them on the board. The opener included an auditory, kinesthetic, and visual component that spotlighted student generated ideas about the topic. Piaget and Vygotsky did not see eye to eye on majority of their research and theories but they both agreed that it is important for children to have collaboration with others while learning. This activity definitely gave an opportunity for students to collaborate with one another and develop ideas before returning to a full classroom setting. The only thing I might change in the introduction of the lesson is allowing the students to first complete the opening activity individually so that they have time to generate ideas on their own. I have worked in groups where some strong personalities have taken over the whole conversation and shyer students were not able to form their own ideas before being told them by another student. Since there were other opportunities for group work planned, I might use a Think, Pair, Share format.
Little to no instruction is given at the very beginning of the lesson. Instead, students are pulled into the lesson by listening to only the first three lines of the poem on an audio track, then they are asked to use forced retrieval of any prior knowledge they may have had about litter. Solely listening to the poem first, then writing examples of what litter is on the board would have effectively created mental pictures for the students to refer back to as the poem was listened to aloud. Deductive learning was utilized when the instructor gave the students the defining attributes of what litter is and then reinforced the rules with worksheets that showed positive examples of what litter is. This part of the lesson was very crucial because it would have clearly defined what litter was for any students that may not have known, or created reinforcement of old knowledge for any students who had already possessed this prior knowledge. I think that the instructor should have used inductive learning to expose the students to the concept of litter. By giving them positive and negative examples of litter, the students would be forced to think and discover what the defining attributes of it were. Little to no thought is involved when the student is outright given the answer. It cuts down the probability of that student retaining the material.
After the opening activity, the teacher planned four tasks (learning activities) that varied in length from 5 minutes to 20 minutes. The attention span of students lasts about 15-25 minutes depending on the subject, so it was a good idea to plan several short activities to keep the students focused and engaged in the material. According to the Cue theory we forget things because we did not have enough associations attached to it. By having several learning activities that varied in length, it kept the students engaged and increased the chance that the student would create quality associations with the material through any or all of the activities.
Group work was utilized at several points in the lesson in order to create personal associations or relevance with the material as well as connect peers together. This is important because students are more likely to be engaged in material that is relevant to them and that they can make a personal connection to. Working in groups would allow students to generate more ideas about the topic than if working individually. Working in groups also allows students to build off each other’s thoughts and ideas and make a personal connection with each other. For example, one group activity in the lesson allowed students to make a personal connection when they were asked to write down their answers to discussion question “Where is the litter problem very bad near your school or home?” By asking students to recall times in their own lives where they have seen litter, it opened up discussion between peers and allowed them to share their similar and different experiences. This makes them personally realize or notice their surroundings more and they may connect with another student in the class who lives nearby too.
The formal operational stage of Piaget's theory of cognitive development allows children age eleven into adulthood to use abstract thought and comprehend hypothetical situations. It also allows for thinking abstractly about language. The students in this lesson have to think abstractly about the diction of the poem and how it affects the overall meaning of the poem before they are able to construct their own verse of it later. The overall lesson plan also allows ample time for students to share personal experiences and or interactions with the surrounding environment as part of the learning process, which is an emphasis with Piaget’s theory.
The students are given the definitions of some key terms on a worksheet to help guide them through the poem as they utilize the learning techniques of rereading and underlining/highlighting. Underlining/highlighting can be called a low utility when used improperly, but when used correctly, both of the learning techniques are used in a way that is beneficial to students. Having them reread the poem several times and search for the key words themselves, instead of giving them the answer, strengthens their ability to retrieve that information later. They had to struggle to find it; it was not just given to them. The lesson takes place over a 60-90 minute period, which allows more than the 30 minutes it takes to effectively store information. This means the students will be more likely to absorb more of the information and be able to recall it later.
Throughout the lesson, maintenance rehearsal occurs through the use of repetition. As students work through the lesson’s activities they will have listened to the poem on an audio track, reread the poem several times on their own, and also read it aloud within groups. In addition to that type of direct repetition, the lesson also called for students to have the opportunity to discuss the information about litter that they had just learned in various group activities. The group discussion questions guided the students to break down the information that was already presented to them by the instructor and forced them to be able to elaborate on the material they learned in their own words. By utilizing the utility tool of summarizing and paraphrasing in order to answer the group discussion questions, the students would ultimately end up creating deeper associations and understandings of the topic of the poem. Maintenance rehearsal was used effectively in these cases because students would be able formulate answers to the questions but also be able to explain their answers to their peers through using their own words. They will then associate their deeper meanings of the poem with specific parts of the poem they were asked to reread and analyze. These skills helped strengthen the student’s ability to create his or her own special meaning in their own litter poem verse they create at the end of the lesson.
As a class, their instructor teaches the students how to clap out the rhythm to the poem as they simultaneously read the words. Modeling is used here in order for the students to see how the task should be completed. The material is reinforced when the students break into small groups and practice clapping out the rhythm of the poem themselves while having kids in their group each try their hand at reading the words along with it. The students are actively engaged with one another, as each student has to reread the poem out loud to the rhythm being clapped out for them. Ultimately, they will end up hearing or rereading the poem several times over but probably will not even realize that they are learning because they will be so engaged in the activity.
Elaborative rehearsal is seen as one of the more effective ways of storing information into long-term memory, and it is utilized throughout this whole lesson. Students have several points where they are able to connect visual associations to the imagery the words in the poem create. It teaches the students to problem solve and use context clues to be able to define the words. They would associate the picture that they saw when reading the imagery with the word that evoked the imagery. Attempting to form mental images of text materials while reading or listening is using the learning technique imagery for text. This technique can strengthen a learner’s ability to retain information because it allows them to attach meaning to the visuals they are associating with what they are learning. The brain loves imagery, and images make it much easier to store a lot of information in one-picture verse trying to make the students recite the important vocabulary words. It also allows them to create chunks or a meaningful unit of information of the material to be able to group with other schemas later.
As far as scaffolding goes, this lesson tried to use several instructional techniques in order to break down the framework of the poetry lesson into parts for the students. As the lesson reached the ending assessment, the students should have been able to build on all the broken down parts of the lesson in order to create their own verse of the poem. This was done in order to meet the lesson objective of introducing students to the concept of litter through poetry. For example, the lesson plan calls for students to work in groups and share their own personal experiences or knowledge about litter. The supporting materials used with the lesson included visual aids such as a graphic organizer and a picture of litter flowing down a hill towards a stream. Poetry was used to symbolize litter and the effects on the environment.
The scaffolding used in the sense of breaking down the concept of litter was very effective. Every activity built on the concept of what litter was and broke it down for the students to create a deeper understanding for it through individual worksheet activities and interactive group activities. However, where this lesson fell short in terms of scaffolding was being able to break down the poetry concepts along with the litter concepts. The objective wanted to introduce students to the concept of litter through poetry and it did achieve that. What the lesson needed to also include was breaking down the framework of what poetry is. There were explanations about the rhythm of a poem, but not what important aspects of a poem are and how to construct one. It relied heavily on the students having to rely on previous knowledge of poetry in order to understand this lesson.
The last part of the lesson forces the students to retrieve all the information they learned in order to write their own verse of the litter poem. It is a version of giving them a practice test to evaluate if they fully understood the material and how to correctly apply it. This type of task is an authentic product task. After creating their own verse to the poem, students present their different verses and explain in detail about why they made the choices they did while writing. It allows the teacher to assess whether the students can construct a substantial, tangible product showing their understanding and mastery of the concepts or not. This summative assessment method is an effective way to test if students took away from the lesson what the objectives wanted them to.
This lesson plan was very consistent in providing support for students as they were learning and figuring out how to interpret and apply the different aspects of poetry. It coincided with a mixture of the collaborative learning guidelines that Piaget and Vygotsky supported for growth and learning and created a motivating stimulating environment for the students to work in. The lesson used several short activities throughout the class period to motivate the learners and keep them engaged until the very end. At the end a culminating activity allowed students to create a personal verse for the poem to be displayed around the school as part of their own anti-litter campaign. This was a good authentic assessment tool to wrap up the ending of the lesson plan. It brought the material full circle by having the students apply the knowledge they learned in the lesson along with their prior knowledge of poetry to create their own verse for the poem. It also gave the students a chance to show off their creative abilities and have a chance to choose what they wanted to write. However, this lesson plan did rely heavily on students already being exposed to poetry and understanding the basic foundations of how to write it. Any students who did not understand poetry well may have been confused or not motivated on how to write their own verse at the end.
https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/Litter%20poem%20Lesson%20plan.pdf
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)