Component 2

Justification of the teaching sequence of lessons, teaching strategies for learning

and engagement for whole class and my three target students.

By the end of Year 3, the Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) states
that students should understand the difference and purpose of text types. Students are
becoming confident at reading and writing various types of text. Students are also able create
meaning from text types that are relatable to in their own lives. Students are also aware that
language features adjust with the text type and they understand how to express, persuade and
use images to add to ideas. Students are developing sound grammar, punctuation and
vocabulary and spelling ability. Students are also encouraged to proofread and edit their
work and they know how this should be presented.

During my final practicum I have taught persuasive and procedural text, grammar and a
poetry unit that is almost complete. Prior to commencing my performance poetry unit of work
a class discussion to tap into prior knowledge occurred. For example students were asked
what poetry is? Who their favourite poet was if they had one? The purpose of poetry followed
by performance in poetry.

During my EPR201 unit I was introduced to the explicit I do, You do, We do teaching model
which has been embedded into my practise and is identified in my fully developed lesson
plans accompanying my performance poetry unit of work (9-10 lessons). This model is
simple as there is a gradual release of responsibility for learning from the teacher to the
students. At the end of explicit teaching students returned to their desks to complete a written
activity. For every lesson taught in the curriculum there is a clearly defined Learning
Intention and Success Criteria. At Driver Primary School there is an emphasis on visible
learning and I would stop the lesson half way to check in with students to see how they were
going and the same time revisit our lesson intention and success criteria. I found this
effective as I could use other students work as an example, or correct a problem more than
one child might have made. I also found it effective to roam the classroom and provide
verbal feedback to individual students. As described by Bohnacker-Bruce (2013) feedback is
a crucial part of student learning and at the same time for feedback to matter it needs to be
rich enough to engage a student in order to improve a piece of work. I have identified
differentiation in my unit of work and have outlined what this looks like in two fully
developed lesson plans. The I do, You do, We do teaching model looks like this:

1
Retrieved from: https://twowritingteachers.org/2014/12/13/throwback-week-i-do-we-do-you-do/

Although, during the delivery of this unit is what not possible to use the ICT suite due to PAT
testing I incorporated videos, PowerPoints, animations and poetry performances which
bought the unit alive. Incorporating various lesson supports as described resulted in the
students better understanding and engaging in performance poetry. I ensured that a plenary
concluded each lesson for the students but I also understand the importance of reflecting on
elements of the lesson I delivered. While my unit of work was lengthy reflection at the end of
the lesson helped me to better prepare or make adjustements in terms of differentiation for my
focus students.

In terms of my target students I differentiated and catered for their learning needs by firstly
considering flexible grouping within the classroom environment. Castle et. al (2005),
specifically states that by taking into consideration grouping organisational strategies
addresses varying abilities of academic, language, social and cultural needs. Due to the
varied nature of modern classrooms differentiated instruction is absolutely necessary. I
noticed that students performed better overall due to grouping. Driver Primary School has
adapted and implemented Kagan Australias philosophy. In other words this is a structure
that supports active engagement and cooperative learning. For example, grouping student is
more than just allowing students to sit where they please. Kagan Australia conducted
extensive research into catering for student needs simply by grouping one student from the

2
following categories: special needs, high achieving, gifted, urban, rural, and all ethnic and
racial groups (Kagan Australia, 2016). In Kagan language co-operative learning not only
meets the needs of students but far exceeds expectations by improving:
The academic outcomes for low achieving students (Student C);
The opportunity for cross-race friendships (Student C);
Enhancing social skills, caring, helping and sharing (Student A and B); and
Self-esteem and peer self-esteem is improved (All students);

Below is a table of differentiation and general adjustments that I incorporated in order to

address my individual students needs for the first two fully developed lesson plans of my
performance poetry unit:

Performance Student A Student B Student C

Poetry Lessons (Above Year level) (At Year level) (At Year level)
Lesson 1: Will write and This student was This student was
Exploring poetry deliver 3 stanzas of asked to write 2 -3 supported by me.
patterns the I Am poem. stanzas of the I He was asked to
Am poem, but she write and deliver 2
wrote 4. stanzas.
Lesson 2: Identified all parts of Identified verbs and Teacher supported
Performance and speech and rules in phrases that alluded lesson to identify
styles of poems The Huntsmen to speed rules in this poem.
Poem

Further focus on student needs

References
http://www.winchester.ac.uk/Studyhere/ExcellenceinLearningandTeaching/research/e-
journals/Documents/Effective%20feedback%20The%20student%20perspective.pdf

Castle, Sharon, Deniz, Carla Baker, & Tortora, Michael. (2005). Flexible
Grouping and Student Learning in a High-Needs School. Education and Urban
Society, 37(2), 139-150.

3
4