Brianna

King - 18141027

102086 Designing Teaching & Learning

Assessment 2

Lesson Plan Analysis

Contents

Lesson Plan Analysis .2

Modified Lesson Plan .4

Academic Justification .5

References .9

Learning Portfolio Web Link .10

1
Brianna King - 18141027

English Lesson Plan Analysis

1 Intellectual quality
1.1 Deep knowledge
4 Comments: Deep knowledge of the topic content is continuously presented through
out the class through the lesson structure. All activities are classwork is related to a
speech or concepts surrounding speeches, which allows the students to gain a
deeper knowledge on the speeches.
1.2 Deep understanding
4 Comments: The lesson structure allows students to constantly be participating in
activities that when executed correctly would allow students to gain a deep
understanding of the speeches. Students are able to present their work in a way that
promotes providing information, arguments and reasoning on the topic.
1.3 Problematic knowledge
2 Comments: Students are presented tasks to which their knowledge is vital yet
problematic knowledge is hardly included. Students however are asked to do a
Venn Diagram, which does present a comparison on the two speeches but this does
not channel much problematic knowledge.
1.4 Higher-order thinking
3 Comments: Students are demonstrating lower-order thinking through activities in
class by only recounting one speech at a time. However high-order thinking
through the use of the Venn Diagram involves students have to critically compare
the two speeches.
1.5 Metalanguage
3 Comments: Some evidence of metalanguage is present through out description in
the lesson plan. The class would benefit from more frequent use of metalanguage.
1.6 Substantive communication
5 Comments: The lesson plan allows substantive communication through the use of
activities, which allow the students to constantly be in communication with one
another. The students and the teacher are also communicating through in class
activities.
Quality learning environment
2.1 Explicit quality criteria
2 Comments: Students are given specific tasks to perform and are aware of these
outlines. Students however are not given a specific time line of how long tasks
should take or what standards are expected of these tasks.
2.2 Engagement
3 Comments: Engagement in the class could be potentially be quite successful due to
constant engagement between the students and their work. Students could easily
loose engagement and come off the task through the use of students talking to their
peers about other things instead of their task in the group work.
2.3 High expectations
3 Comments: Students are constantly working through-out the lesson as directed via
the lesson plan. The lesson plan however contains copious amounts of work for
only one lesson, therefore meaning that students could easily disengage in the
lesson if they fall behind the tight schedule.
2.4 Social support
3 Comments: If students were to follow the lesson plan as directed there would be
mildly positive social support for the whole class. Engaged students would gain

2
Brianna King - 18141027

more social support from this lesson through the communication of the teacher.
2.5 Students’ self-regulation
3 Comments: Engaged students would be showing high self-regulation skills, as
lesson is content heavy therefore in order to complete it they would be constantly
working. Disengaged students would easily get distracted in the group work, which
can lead to disruptions in the class.
2.6 Student direction
3 Comments: The lesson plan allows for a large amount of student direction due to
activities being regulated by the student’s thoughts and ideas. The student direction
in the class can be lost if students fall behind in the tasks set.
3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
2 Comments: Students are told at the start of the lesson plan that the speeches they
are learning have a connection to the text types they have been studying. Student’s
background knowledge of other text types has no relation to the rest of the lesson,
therefore it becomes trivial.
3.2 Cultural knowledge
2 Comments: When studying Martin Luther King background knowledge would
become evident in the lesson in order to understand the context of the speech. The
rest of the lesson however does not have illicit references to any other cultures.
3.3 Knowledge integration
2 Comments: Knowledge of the speeches is specifically only referenced to tasks in
the class, with only the reference to the topic area of text types. The lesson plan
outlines that the speeches will highlight the power of texts but there is other
meaningful connections.
3.4 Inclusivity
5 Comments: The lesson plan has included all social groups and has not illustrated
that there will be any form of social group not participating. This lesson plan has
successfully integrated all social groups throughout.
3.5 Connectedness
1 Comments: There is no connection to anything outside of the classroom. Further
knowledge surrounding the significance of the speeches and their relevance to the
world now would be extremely beneficial to the students.
3.6 Narrative
2 Comments: Narrative structure in the lesson plan is only used to outline to lesson
and used to connected parts of the lesson together but has no other significance to
the lesson.

Identifying Areas for Improvement

Identify the four NSW QT model elements you are targeting for improvement.

QT model
1) 2.1 Explicit Quality Criteria 2) 3.1 Background Knowledge
3) 3.2 Cultural Knowledge 4) 3.5 Connectedness

3
Brianna King - 18141027

Modified Lesson Plan

Topic area: Stage of Learner: Syllabus Pages: 141-158

Close look at speeches Stage 5 – Year 10
Date: 21/05/18 Location Booked: Lesson Number: 1/4
English classroom
Time: Total Number of students Printing/preparation
1 hour 26 Assessment Task.
Martin Luther King “I have a
dream” speech.
Both Worksheets.

Outcomes Assessment Students learn about Students learn to

Students are Students learn about Students learn about the
presented with speeches as powerful significance
Syllabus outcomes assessment task spoken texts by surrounding the context
that is to be studying Martin of the speech.
EN5-1A: Responds to and presented in Luther King’s “I have
composed lesson 4/4. a dream”. Students learn the
increasingly effects of how powerful
sophisticated and and purposeful the
sustained texts for speech was, both in past
understanding, and present tense.
interpretation, critical
analysis, imaginative Students learn to
expression and identify key language
pleasure. features presented in
the speech.
ACELY1750: Identify and
expose the purposed
and effects of
different text
structures and
language features of
spoken texts, and use
this knowledge to
relate purposeful texts
that inform, persuade
and engage.

Time Teaching and learning actions

10:05 Remind students of the range of text types they have studied and indicate that this
lesson will be focused on speeches as powerful examples of spoken texts. Explain
to the students that there will be two speeches they are learning about, but for
today it will be Martin Luther King’s ‘I have a dream’, and ask students if they
are familiar with this speech or Martin Luther King.

10:10 Provide students with ten minutes to research two to four important facts about
Martin Luther King. Whilst students are researching hand out the worksheet

4
Brianna King - 18141027

regarding the Martin Luther King speech. Ask a few students to present what they
10:20 have found. Write these findings on the board and summarise these findings to
the students and highlight the importance of this speech both in the context of
when it was present and the relevance the speech still holds today.
View the Martin Luther King Speech.
(Note: Advise the students that this speech is not the full speech)

10:30

Students then write down their initial thoughts in answer to the questions
regarding King’s speech. As they will only have a short amount of time make it
10:37 clear to the students that they only have to write one or two high quality
sentences.

Facilitate small group discussions where students can share their answers.
Ask Students to share their thoughts on the speech and provide some of their
answers from the worksheet.
10:45

Ask students how they feel about studying speeches in comparison to the other
10:50 text types they have studied so far. Present students with Assessment Task
Outlines and ‘Plan Your Own Speech’ worksheets. Assign the ‘Plan Your Own
Speech” as homework and explain to the class that the work sheet will help assist
them with the assessment.
11:00 Class Dismissed.

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

ACELY1750 Students have explored the purpose and effect of
Martin Luther King’s speech, whilst presenting the
findings of the language techniques used in the
speech.

WORKSHEETS

Http://www.capthat.com.au/sites/default/files/Close%20look%20at%20speeches%20worksheet%201.
docx

http://www.capthat.com.au/sites/default/files/Close%20look%20at%20speeches%20worksheet%202.
docx

5
Brianna King - 18141027

Academic Justification

This lesson plan presented copious amounts of work for the students to keep occupied in class, and

was full of content and had the potential to achieve great results, however, due to this overload of

content the students would only be getting a brief look into the speeches instead of a gaining a deep

understanding and knowledge of the speeches context and techniques. With assistance from the

Quality Teaching Guide I have adjusted the; 2.1 Explicit Quality Criteria, 3.1, Background

Knowledge, 3.2 Cultural Knowledge and 3.5 Connectedness (NSW Department of Education,

2003) in the lesson plan in order to improve the flow of the lesson as well as the quality of the work

produced to be of a higher level. All the standards are designed to make sure the students learning

experiences are ‘deep and meaningful’ (Gore, 2007, p. 17), in correlation with a “connection

between curriculum, instruction and student learning” (Hall and Smith, 2006, p. 425). The adjusted

criterion has helped improved aspects of the original lesson that did not allow full student potential.

The quality learning environment is aimed at supporting the students learning as well as focusing

on aspects of the pedagogy (Gore, 2007, Hall and Smith 2006), in relation to this in the original

lesson plan standard 2.1 had little detailed or specific accounts of the quality of work that was

required throughout the class (NSW Department of Education, 2003), which effects both the

pedagogy and student learning. The class were instructed on what tasks they had to perform, but no

information followed on of what the qualities of expectations were. I adjusted the lesson plan to

have specific references to the length, quality and time of the work presented. The original lesson

plan was extremely content heavy which is why the quality of work could not of been either set or

achieved, as not enough time would be spent on either speech to gain deeper knowledge and there

would have been a cognitive overload (NSW Department of Education, 2017). Cramming too much

work in a lesson can affect the focus on students as they can become lost and unaware of the bigger

6
Brianna King - 18141027

picture of their classwork (Fisher, Frey 2011). It is important to have the students aware of what

each lesson is going to do in relation to the next (Fisher, Frey 2011), which is why I included the

first and last part of the lesson plan to discuss what they had previously studied, an indication of

their future studies and how this relates to their assessments. I adjusted the lesson plan to only focus

on the one speech per lesson as I felt the students are then able to gain a deeper understanding of

the speech as well as the quality of the work being outline and hopefully the work produced would

be of a higher quality.

Standard 3.1 was briefly explained in the start of the lesson plan, but there is no other mention of

the other text types they have previously studied. In relation to the quality teaching standards I have

included specific tasks that engage with background knowledge by finding out any knowledge that

the students have about the topic as well as providing the students with an activity to gain a deeper

understanding of the background context (NSW Department of Education, 2003). In correlation

with standard 3.1 I have also adjusted standard 3.2, as I felt it was important to not only understand

the background knowledge of the speech but also the huge cultural context that is related to the

speech. Martin Luther King’s speech addresses socioeconomic status, ethnicity and race therefore a

cultural knowledge is needed in order for students to understand the speech to its full extent (NSW

Department of Education, 2003). Standard 3.5 was not evident on the original lesson plan at all, I

chose to adjust this by adding conversations about how this speech is of importance to our current

modern society and how the same issues are still present. This adjustment hopefully would allow

students to then be able to take what they have learnt in the classroom and apply their knowledge

beyond classroom (NSW Department of Education, 2003). A combination of the adjustment and

modification of these four standards would hopefully produce a greater lesson and quality of work.

7
Brianna King - 18141027

In conclusion, the basis of the lesson plan provided had potential to be a successful lesson, but due

to the lack of several basic quality standards it was unsuccessful in achieving its full potential, and

therefore the students would not of been able to achieve a positive learning experience. The above

changes have helped in assisting the quality of work produce in the class allowing a higher quality

of work being produced in the class.

8
Brianna King - 18141027

References

Fisher, D., Frey, N. (2011). Focusing on Learning Targets, Not Tasks, Purposeful Classroom: how

to structure Lessons with Learning Goals in Mind, 22-44. Retrieved From

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uwsau/reader.action?docID=806870&ppg=31

Gore, J. (2007). Improving Pedagogy, Making a Difference: Challenges for Teachers. Teaching and

Teacher Education, Sense Publishers, 15-32.

Hall, T., Smith, M. (2006). Teacher Planning, Instruction and Reflection: What We Know About

Teacher Cognitive Processes, Quest 58(4), 424-442. Retrieved From

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00336297.2006.10491892?needAccess=true

New South Wales Department of Education. (2003), A classroom practice guide, Quality teaching

in NSW public schools. Retrieved From

http://mscplc.weebly.com/uploads/4/8/0/8/4808031/quality_teaching_guide.pdf

New South Wales Department of Education. (2017). Cognitive load theory: Research that teachers

really need to understand. Education Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation. Retrieved

From

https://vuws.westernsydney.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-3373963-dt-content-rid-

25987854_1/courses/102081_2018_1h/cognitive_load_theory_report_AA1.pdf

New South Wales Education Standards Authority (2012). English K-10 Syllabus, NSW Syllabus

for the Australian curriculum. Retrieved From

http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/englishk10/downloads/englishk10_full.pdf

9
Brianna King - 18141027

Learning Portfolio Web Link

www.briannaking7.weebly.com

10