Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Student Characteristics
Context
th
Grade Level(s): 7
L2 Proficiency: ELLs are Advanced/Transitional. Several students have English as their L1.
L2 Literacy Levels: Intermediate/Advanced
between elements of fiction (standard 7.1.D.3); analyze characters (standard 7.1.D.4); describe how
meaning is conveyed in author’s stylistic choices (standard 7.1.D.7); respond to literature using details to
Context
support reactions (standard 7.1.D.8); create narratives that develop people/characters (standard
7.2.B.2); use composing processes (standard 7.2.B.4); various spelling, grammar and usage standards
(standard 7.2.C)
Unit-Level Goals:
Essential Questions:
How do authors create vivid characters? How can readers understand characters? Where do authors
hide clues about characters in texts? How can readers find and understand those clues? How do the
words and constructions authors choose to describe characters affect our perceptions?
Enduring Understandings:
Students will understand that…authors use interactions with others, actions, physical
description, dialogue, and thoughts to flesh out characters. Students will understand that in academic
writing, assertions must be backed with evidence.
Students will be able to….create distinct characters in the context of narratives, using
interactions, actions, description, dialogue and thoughts. Students will be able to make inferences and
support them with textual evidence. Students will be able to construct complex compound sentences as
required for cognitive academic language writing proficiency. Students will be able to determine
meanings of unfamiliar words using context clues. Students will be able to monitor comprehension
using self-questioning.
Lindsay Kaye Ohlert
CI 5631 Literacy Lesson Plan
Fall 2009
Day One (block schedule):
Lesson Topic: How do authors create vivid characters? How can readers understand characters?
Learning Objectives
Content: Students will identify how physical description, interactions, speech/writing,
thoughts, and actions contribute to creating a vivid character. Students will support inferences with
factual evidence.
Language: Using phrases such as “I think” and “I know” and conjunctions such as “because,”
students will form compound complex declarative sentences in the present tense in order to state and
Desired Results
support assertions.
Learning Strategies: Students will use self-questioning to monitor comprehension and make
inferences.
Materials/Resources: Transparency or scan of the cover of No, David! (David Shannon) displayed on
overhead or LCD projector, writing journals, photocopies of David Talamantez on the Last Day of Second
Grade (Rosemary Catacalos), post-it tabs, brown paper bags, writing utensils. Optional: crafting supplies
such as colored paper, glue, scissors, etc.
Learning Activities/Tasks
Preview Phase—“into” activities (15 min)
Do-now activity: as students enter the room, the cover of No, David! is displayed on the board,
and students respond to the prompt “Please describe David.” in their journals. (5 min)
Teacher calls on students to share observations about David. If a student makes an inference
(e.g. “David is naughty”) the teacher asks what about the picture showed that; teacher points
out when students are using components of characterization in their observations (e.g. “Good,
that’s a fact about how David looks/acts/interacts/etc.”) (5 min)
Teacher displays a list of components of characterization on the board (physical description,
Learning Experiences
actions, interactions, thoughts, speech/writing) and checks to makes sure all students
understand what each term means. (5 min)
David Talamantez, whose mother is at work, leaves his mark things are big, much bigger than Talamantez's tiny writing.
everywhere in the schoolyard, Write larger, his teacher says
tosses pages from a thick sheaf of lined paper high in the air one
by one, watches them in red ink across the tops of many pages. Messy! she says on
others where he has erased
catch on the teachers' car bumpers, drift into the chalky narrow and started over, erased and started over. Spelling, Language
shade of the water fountain. Expression, Sentences Using
One last batch, stapled together, he rolls tight into a makeshift
horn through which he shouts the Following Words. Neck. I have a neck name. No! 20’s, 30's.
Think again! He's good
David! and David, yes! before hurling it away hard and darting in Art, though, makes 70 on Reading Station Artist's Corner,
across Barzos Street against where he's traced and colored
the light, the little sag of head and shoulders when, safe on the
other side, he kicks a can an illustration from Henny Penny. A goose with red-and-white
striped shirt, a hen in a turquoise
in the gutter and wanders toward home. David Talamantez dress. Points off for the birds, cloud and butterfly he's drawn in
believes birds are warm blooded, freehand. Not in the original
the way they are quick in the air and give out long strings of
complicated music, different picture! Twenty-five points off for writing nothing in the blank
after This is my favorite scene
all the time, not like cats and dogs. For this he was marked down in the book because . . . There's a page called Rules. Listen!
in Science, and for putting Always working! Stay in your seat!
his name in the wrong place, on the right with the date instead
of on the left with Science Raise your hand before you speak! No fighting! Be quiet! Rules
copied from the board, no grade,
Questions, and for not skipping a line between his heading and only a huge red checkmark. Later there is a test on Rules. Listen!
answers. The X's for wrong Alay ercng! Sast in ao snet!
Lindsay Kaye Ohlert
CI 5631 Literacy Lesson Plan
Fall 2009
Rars aone bfo your spek! No finagn! Be cayt! He gets 70 on and all the others, the one in the doorway of La Rosa Beauty
Rules, 10 on Spelling. An old man Shop, the one that blew under
stoops to pick up a crumpled drawing of a large family crowded the pool table at La Tenampa, the ones older kids have wadded
around a table, an apartment up like big spitballs, the ones run
with bars on the windows in Alazan Courts, a huge sun in one over by cars. On every single page David Talamantez has crossed
corner saying, Tomush noys! out the teacher's red numbers
After correcting the spelling, the grade is 90. Nice details! And and written in giant letters, blue ink, Yes! David, yes!
there's another mark, on this paper
Learning Objectives
Content: Students will make and support inferences. Students will employ the five
Desired Results
Language: Using phrases such as “I think” and “I know” and conjunctions such as “because,”
students will form compound complex declarative sentences in the present tense in order to state and
support assertions.
Learning Strategies: Students will use context clues to understand unfamiliar words. Students
will use graphic organizers in pre-writing.
Learning Activities/Tasks
Today’s class is divided into two distinct lessons.
Lesson One (30 min):
Learning Experiences
Students’ verbal responses to teacher elicitation of definitions (context clues learning strategy)
Accuracy and reasonableness of students inference statements (inference content objective,
language objective)
Inclusion and integration of all five components of characterization in the web and vignette
draft (characterization content objective, graphic organizer strategy)
Lindsay Kaye Ohlert
CI 5631 Literacy Lesson Plan
Fall 2009
Literacy Lesson Planning Reflection
In these lessons, I attempted to combine content, language and strategy objectives that fit together
organically and reinforced one another. I decided to focus on strategy objectives related to self-questioning and
using context clues because they both relied on the same actions required to perform the content objective of
making and supporting inferences – the need to ask oneself incisive questions in order to better understand what
the author is communicating, and to answer those questions using textual evidence. I also chose these objectives
with a particular group of students in mind, most of whom can decode and read aloud like brilliant orators, but
tend to misunderstand texts due to gaps in vocabulary knowledge and lack of habitual close textual examination at
I chose to repeat the one language objective because I see the need for a good deal of practice in this
area. The students I had in mind when I created this lesson tend to write either short, choppy sentences or
convoluted run-ons. They also have a good grasp of basic interpersonal communication, but not cognitive
academic language proficiency, and the ability to support assertions with facts is crucial for the vast majority of
pieces of academic writing (Peregoy & Boyle, 2008, p. 63). I hope that sufficient practice with the grammatical
constructions required to do so will reduce the cognitive load required to formulate the statements, allowing them
to devote more mental resources to making reasonable arguments well-backed with factual evidence. Basically, I
hope the emphasis on this particular language objective allows students to practice this construction and the
related content skill to the point of automaticity; I wish to “equip” them with this useful academic writing tool
Many factors contributed to my decision to use the David Talamantez on the Last Day of Second Grade
poem and the Daughters of Memory excerpt. The David Talamantez poem is, admittedly, a fairly difficult text for
this group of students, but I chose it both despite and because of the difficulty. First, David’s experience is one
that many students can identify with, creating a high-interest “hook” (Ibid, p. 197). Second, the text portrays a
character clearly and strongly without relying much, if at all, on the “physical appearance” component of
characterization, and in my experience many authors this age tend to focus on describing their characters’ hair,
clothing and so forth to the exclusion of other characterization components. Third, I wanted a text that would
Lindsay Kaye Ohlert
CI 5631 Literacy Lesson Plan
Fall 2009
challenge all the students (Blaz, 2006, p. 27), even the higher level ones, and I believe the density and unusual
formatting does this without making the text excessively inaccessible to the less fluent readers. In response to the
difficulty, I specifically structured the lesson so that the students never needed to tackle understanding this poem
alone – we go through it as a class, then work in partners – as the text is certainly above most students’
independent reading levels, and would definitely be frustrating if not thoroughly scaffolded (Peregoy & Boyle,
2008, p. 296). The teacher and peer support should allow students to work at the upper end of their zones of
proximal development (Ibid, p. 396). That said, for students who are less confident in tackling unfamiliar writing
styles, or who need additional support, I could definitely see myself providing a re-formatted version of the text
where each full sentence was on a separate line, making the text appear more approachable and be easier to read
fluently and naturally (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 197; Blaz, 2006, pg. 52). As for the Daughters of Memory
excerpt, I am not in love with it, as it feels somewhat empty separated from its context and doesn’t come from a
particularly literary source to begin with, but it ties in nicely with the writing activity, as it’s a first person vignette,
and it contains enough obvious subtext to enable students to readily make inferences. Also, the “first day of first
grade” subject matter connects nicely David’s last day of second grade. That said, I wouldn’t hesitate to substitute
a different brief excerpt from, say, the autobiography of a person related to the students’ current social studies
unit, or a snippet from a novel they’re reading, if something suitable comes up at the time I teach this lesson.
I formatted the lessons to provide natural scaffolding of the reading and writing tasks while thoroughly
covering all the objectives (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 197). Generally speaking, the reading portions of the
lessons begin with using the comprehension strategies to access the texts (Peregoy & Boyle, 2008, p. 352), then
move to using the content objectives to probe the texts more deeply, then the language objectives to respond. In
the writing portion of the last lesson, I chose to have the students create character-driven vignettes about
themselves in order to help them connect the objectives to their personal experiences, making them more
relevant and memorable, and also to raise the interest level – early adolescents do love talking about themselves.
I also included copious modeling, both by the teacher and by other students (Cappellini, 2005, p. 61).
Lastly, I should mention that running these lessons as written would require a supportive classroom
culture, well-established routines, and students who are already motivated and have a positive sense of self-
efficacy. The lessons are tightly paced, and it’d be impossible to complete them if students do not already
Lindsay Kaye Ohlert
CI 5631 Literacy Lesson Plan
Fall 2009
automatically carry out routines, like starting their “do-now” immediately upon entering the room (Blaz, 2006, p.
28). The difficulty of the David poem requires students to engage actively and believe in their own abilities. The
challenge of responding aloud in front of the whole class and tossing out ideas, questions and attempts which
could be incorrect requires that students feel comfortable both with one another and with the instructor and
comfortable with correction (Ibid, p.30). Thus, these are not lessons for early in the school year, and they would
need to be modified somewhat if one wanted to do them with a more challenging group of students.
Works Cited
Blaz, D. (2006). Differentiated Instruction: A Guide for Foreign Language Teachers. Larchmont, NY: Eye on
Education.
Cappellini, M. (2005). Balancing Reading and Language Learning. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Peregoy, S., & Boyle, O. (2008). Reading, Writing and Learing in ESL. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.