UNIT REPORT

Year 9 Romeo and Juliet Unit:

Recommendations for Positive Changes

Amy Sanday
17821386
Contemporary Teacher Leadership 102098
CONTENTS
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE
REPORT......................................................................................................... 1

Context of the School ............................................................................................................ 2

Positives of the Unit ............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Recommendations for Change............................................................................................... 3

RESOURCE LIST.......................................................................................... 6

APPENDIX .................................................................................................... I

Comparative Table with Resources ....................................................................................... ii

Original Unit Outline with Recommended Amendments .................................................... v
Scope and Sequence ......................................................................................................... xvii
Recreated Assessment Task ............................................................................................... xix
EVALUATION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
CHANGE

CONTEXT OF THE SCHOOL

This report is based on a unit overview and program given during
professional teaching practice. The school is a private religious college
situated in a semi-rural area. The unit overview and program provided
described a developed unit for teaching Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet to
Stage 5 focusing on Shakespeare and themes in a modern context. The
classes in the cohort were mixed-ability, and the assigned classes during
professional practice were classes consisting of students from varying
backgrounds, interests, and talents.

At the same school, a strategy for struggling students and learning difficulty
students was to create small, gender-specific classes. Lessons were tailored
to the level and needs of the students. In this report, the unit overview and
program will be assessed and altered for use with an all-male learning
difficulties class.

1
POSITIVES OF THE UNIT
[In the unit overview and program on pages v to xvi of the Appendix, these

The unit overview and program have several positive characteristics which allow

2
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

3
 During professional practice, I had the privilege of teaching an all-male learning
difficulties class, as well as teaching another Shakespeare classic, Macbeth, to this class.
Therefore, my recommendations for changes to the unit overview and program will be
based on both personal experience as well as research, and will focus on increasing
literacy in the classroom through the use of visual literacy.

The first recommendation for change is adjusting the unit description and Other
Texts section. Using the Understanding by Design (UbD) framework and the three
stages of backward design, (McTighe & Wiggins, 2012) the learning goals and desired
results of this unit was for students to understand the themes of Romeo and Juliet in a
modern context and apply these to their understanding of the world. Therefore, the unit
description in the unit overview should reflect these goals and desired results, and has
been amended to be so (p. v).

Below the unit description is the Other Texts section, which highlights texts to
be used as support for exploring the original text. Whilst it is encouraged to use visual
texts alongside works of Shakespeare to greater assist the learning of both original text
and filmic representations (Gannon, 2010), these texts are not enough to assist students
in understanding Romeo and Juliet. Teachers need to use a wide variety of film and
media texts to allow students to extend their understanding, knowledge, and appreciation
of the ways that differing technologies can help to shape varying responses and ideas of a
text (Sawyer & Watson, 2010). From personal experience, I found that showing a class
modern representations of certain scenes from Macbeth when analysing the parallel
scene in the original text assisted their retention of the story and themes more than a
close reading. Regarding English as a Second Language (ESL) students, being exposed to
film and media representations during an exploration of the original text assists these
students in understanding the language and story as well as building their knowledge of
the English language (Leung Che & Wing Bo, 2016). Therefore, I have built upon the
existing Other Texts list and provided supporting texts that can assist in learning Romeo
and Juliet.

CHANGE
4
 Due to Shakespearean language being foreign and difficult to interpret during first
encounters, it is imperative to include visual representations of Romeo and Juliet and its
core themes to ESL students, students with disengagement issues or students with learning
difficulties. Viewing filmic or graphic representations of a Shakespearean text is proven to
increase student comprehension and understanding (Shoemaker 2013). Both learning
difficulties students, as well as male students, are prominently visual learners (Devine,
2016), therefore the incorporation of film and media resources will improve student
learning in this class context.

Alongside the Other Texts section, I have also added an Online Resources
section that provides students and teachers with Information Communication Technologies
(ICT) that allow students to support their reading of the text with translated and
modernised language, and film and media representations. One form of online media that
hosts a Shakespearean adaptation platform is YouTube, which provides teachers with
different representations of Romeo and Juliet (Desmet, 2009). Therefore, the Online
Resources section has been edited to include a greater use of YouTube as a learning
platform.

The second recommendation for change is regarding the assessment task for the
unit, which was listed as a comparative essay. Whilst essays are an easy method for
assessment, the focus of teaching Shakespeare in schools has shifted from a close-reading
and critical approach to a performance and visual approach where the play is treated as a
play and not a novel (Sawyer & Watson, 2010). For ESL students, a task that focuses on
the creative rather than the critical allows them to communicate their understanding and
ideas in a form that is accessible (Leung Che & Wing Bo, 2016). Therefore, I have
included in the appendix an assessment that allows for student choice, as well as allowing
an authentic interaction with the play by collaborating in groups to mimic the roles of
individuals when producing a stage play (Gannon, 2010). This builds personal and social
capabilities in requiring students to have the responsibility of providing individual work to a
larger group to complete a task together. This also allows students to build relationships
with their fellow group members.

For engaging an all-male class and drawing effort from students to achieve, the
literature puts emphasis on allowing male students to master their own learning, and
include humour (Dixon, 2014). This assessment incorporates mastery in the form of
having a choice in the context and design of their scene, and humour in the form of being
able to mess around with ideas. This allows students to build personal and social

5
capabilities as students learn to understand effective modes of learning that benefits
themselves.

The assessment also supports students with learning disabilities as well as focusing
on students preferred skillsets, as the assessment provides visual learning and
representation, and allows each student to take on a preferred role, whether it be creating
or writing (Devine, 2016). The created assessment task also follows the stages of backwards
design in UbD framework (McTighe & Wiggins, 2012) in that the evidence of learning
from the assessment has been determined in stage one and will be assessed.

The third recommendation for change relates to the differentiation of teaching and
learning strategies. Throughout the unit program there are teaching and learning strategies
provided that are engaging and allow for student choice in learning. However, modern
literature has an emphasis on a performance-based approach to learning Shakespeare
(Sawyer & Watson, 2010), therefore I have adjusted the unit program to include
performance-based approaches to exploring Romeo and Juliet. Performance-based
activities benefit ESL students and students with learning disabilities activities as it assists in
gaining a deep understanding of context as well as offering a visual support (Devine, 2016).
Performance-based approaches to Shakespeare also build personal and social capabilities
in that students establish and build positive relationships during group performances, as
well as taking on a leadership role to direct fellow students in a manner that best performs
the task they have been assigned.

Dixons (2014) states that male students find movement and humour engaging,
however they also require a meaning behind their learning. Performance-driven, creative,
and active activities in the classroom can engage students and create meaning in their
learning due to the play being performed in its traditional context (Banks, 2013). Visual
and kinaesthetic learning is both beneficial for students with learning difficulties, ESL
students (Leung Che & Wing Bo, 2016) as well as male students (King & Gurian, 2006).
During professional practice, I experimented with performance activities that the students
engaged with and found humorous and entertaining, however the most prominent and
enthusiastic actors were the male participants. The changes I have made to the unit
program to reflect the literature also follows the third stage of UbD framework (McTighe &
Wiggins, 2012) as the learning experiences and instructions have been planned to attain the
first stages desired results and learning goals, as well as provide the learning and content
needed to attain the evidence of learning from the assessment.

6
Whilst the unit overview and program were well formulated and thought-out, literature
suggests a more performance-based and visual approach to teaching Shakespeare in a
modern society (Sawyer & Watson, 2010; Gannon, 2010; Banks, 2014), especially
regarding engaging male students, ESL students, and assisting students with learning
difficulties (Devine, 2015; Dixon, 2014; Leung Che & Wing Bo, 2016). Therefore, the
suggestions and considerations I have put forth regarding the changes to the unit overview,
program, and assessment to meet the needs of an all-boys, learning difficulties class are well
established in literature. Personal and social capabilities are built through an understanding
of how they learn best, the management of relationships in group tasks and group
performances, and establishing a leadership role during tasks and performances.

7
Banks, F. (2014). Creative Shakespeare: The Globe Education

Guide to Practical Shakespeare. London, United Kingdom:

Bloomsbury Publishing.

Devine, A. (2015). Literacy for Visual Learners: Teaching

Children with Learning Differences to Read, Write,

Communicate and Create. London, United Kingdom: Jessica

Kingsley Publishers.

Desmet, C. (2009). Teaching Shakespeare with YouTube. English Journal, 99(1), 65-

70. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/journals/ej/issues/v99-1

Dixon, E.J. (2014). Six Secrets for Success in Teaching Boys. AMLE

Magazine; Westerville, 1(9), 28-30. Retrieved from

https://www.amle.org/Publications/AMLEMagazine/tabid/176/

Default.aspx

Gannon, S. (2010). Teaching Film. In S. Gannon, M. Howie, W.

Sawyer. (Ed.), Charged with Meaning: Re-viewing English:

Third Edition (pp. 213-219). Putney, Australia: Phoenix

Education.

RESOURCES
8
King, K., & Gurian, M. (2006). Teaching to the Minds of Boys.

Educational Leadership, 61(1), 56-61. Retrieved from

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-

leadership/archived-issues.aspx

Jones, L. (2007). The Student-Centered Classroom. New York, United States

of America: Cambridge University Press.

Leung Che. M.L., Wing Bo, A.T., (2016). Teaching Shakespeare to ESL Students: The

Study of Language Arts in Four Major Plays. Hong Kong, China: Springer

Publishing.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (2012). Understanding by Design

Framework. Retrieved from

http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_W

hitePaper0312.pdf

Sawyer., W. Watson, K. (2010). Teaching Shakespeare Today: An

Introduction. In S. Gannon, M. Howie, W. Sawyer. (Ed.),

Charged with Meaning: Re-viewing English: Third Edition (pp.

213-219). Putney, Australia: Phoenix Education.

Shoemaker, B. (2013). To Read or Not to Read: Five Approaches to

Teaching Shakespeare. English Journal, High school edition;

Urbana, 102(4), 111-114. Retrieved from

http://www.ncte.org/journals/ej/issues

9
10