Standards Covered:
Standard 3:
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
One of my strengths is my planning. I design programs based on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles to ensure all my students are learning, included and challenged. This means setting clear learning goals, giving students choice, using flexible grouping, incorporating multimodal texts and ICT, and differentiating lesson plans, tasks and projects to suit individual student needs (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017).
I develop lessons which respond to diagnostic and formative assessments, are discussion-rich, interactive, and geared toward high order thinking and ethical development. My lessons are logically sequenced for maximum achievement of unit objectives based on the Australian Curriculum and SACE. In my planning, I clearly articulate desirable knowledge, understanding and skills (KUDs), and ensure all my learning tasks contribute to the development of these.
Effective teaching and learning aren't arbitrary; they are the outcome of informed research, imaginative planning, collaboration, adaptable pedagogies and teacher dedication.
Keep scrolling to view evidence of my planning and implementation of a SACE Stage 1 English (Pre Lit) Unit during my final placement, which covers all the 3.0 Standards except 3.7.
Scroll Down
Evidence Set: SACE Stage 1 Unit Plan and Implementation
Item 1: Unit Plan
Item 1: My unit plan for a high-achieving cohort of Stage 1 English (Pre Lit) students was very much driven by context. In Term 1 students had read and analysed Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, while I had observed some of the teaching and learning of this unit during my lead-in observation days. Well-acquainted with Gatsby and increasingly the students, I recommended the film American Beauty as a comparative text for the mandatory intertextual study in SACE Stage 1 (focus area: 2.3). My gracious and flexible mentor allowed me to run with my passion for American Beauty (a conceptually and thematically challenging film, rich in cinematic technique, and therefore likely to engage this cohort) (focus areas: 1.1, 2.1).
I crafted this unit plan for an English Curriculum subject prior to my placement and achieved a High Distinction for it as well as my mentor's approval. The UBD (Understanding by Design) template helps teachers conceive of a unit in terms of desired understandings and align these with SACE Assessment Criteria. One of the overarching understandings I wanted students to take away from this unit was that 'texts create, perpetuate and are in conversation with ideas, i.e. the American Dream' (focus area: 3.1). The rather ambiguous concept of the American Dream was the hinge, and one of many connection points, between the two texts.
The content selection, teaching strategies, structure and sequencing of my lessons in this unit plan were highly evidence based (focus areas: 2.2, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4). You'll notice in red I justify my plan with reference to academic literature about how students learn, and include details about lesson content down to the discussion questions I planned to pose to students, as well as approximate timings of activities. The result is a unit plan which operates as a series of lesson plans too. Although the exact sequencing and a few of the activities planned couldn't be put into practice (for instance, there wasn't enough time for my Creative Writing R.A.F.T), this plan acted as an anchor and a guide in my teaching of this unit.
Keep scrolling to check out my implementation of this unit plan.
Item 2: PowerPoint Slides/Lesson 1
Item 2: Many of my lessons incorporated ICT in the form of multi-modal, interactive presentations to incorporate non-verbal as well as verbal communication (focus area 3.5). My first lesson of the unit was no exception. Before watching American Beauty I wanted students to recall their prior learning of Gatsby, in particular how the book represents the American Dream. As a hook, I showed a snippet from La La Land, a film which plays with a variation of the American Dream, personal fulfillment. I then had students tap into their previous learning by having them discuss in small groups: 'What is the American Dream in The Great Gatsby?' Some students expressed confusion about what the American Dream is. Perfect. My lesson, as anticipated, was necessary.
The point I wanted to get across to students in this lesson was that the American Dream is an ambiguous concept which has several variations. To achieve this I had groups analyse various historical sources and report to the class which variation of the dream their excerpt supported (focus area: 3.3). This proved an effective way to explore the complexities of the dream, thus doing some conceptual groundwork for American Beauty, wherein multiple articulations of the dream compete.
Toward the end of the lesson, it became apparent that I was doing too much talking, getting carried away with academic analysis after too many years as a University student. The beauty of PowerPoint is the multi-model-ness; the pitfall is the temptation to offer too much information. I should have made this lesson more student-centred and task-oriented by having students do a Jigsaw activity with the excerpts or responding in writing to a prompt (focus area 3.6). For homework, I had students read and respond to Langston Hughes's poem Let America Be America Again, which adds another layer to the dream: the dream as the white man's purview (focus area: 3.4).
This PowerPoint above also shows slides from a subsequent lesson where I introduced students to a Critical Race Theory reading of The Great Gatsby. My controversial theory that Gatsby is of African-American descent apparently had students talking in the schoolyard.
Item 3: Critical Viewing of American Beauty
Item 3: After doing some ground work on the American Dream we watched American Beauty, twice: the first time was an uninterrupted surface viewing, the second a critical viewing with much pausing, discussing, commentary and note-taking on themes and film techniques. This double-viewing is a teaching strategy common to the English classroom, as it allows students to evaluate their initial interpretations against critical perspectives (focus areas: 2.1, 3.3).
Before the first viewing I gave students a handout (left) of important techniques to look out for. I noticed the handout was valued by some, however many didn't both reading or even keeping it. In the future, I would do a brainstorming activity instead and have students think of generic film techniques to watch out for (focus area: 3.6)
One thing I didn't anticipate when planning this unit was the students' emotional/moral response to the film itself. Post-MeToo the film's dark themes were confronting to some students, and apparently there was much talk in the schoolyard about Lester Burnham's attraction to the teenage Angela Hayes. I responded to this by scaffolding the film with plenty of class discussion around art, ethics, the law, MeToo, and the film's play with cliche (focus area: 3.3). During the critical viewing the students gained an understanding of the film's complex moral posturings, and their moral outrage softened by the end. It was fascinating to observe students grapple with this film and come to appreciate it. I feel it was the right level of challenge for this high-achieving cohort.
See my mentor's comments below regarding my facilitation of the critical viewing and discussion.
Item 4:Formative tasks - American Beauty
Homework questions
Immediately following the critical viewing students were required to analyse and interpret aspects of the film. This was a differentiated (according to interest and readiness) homework task where students chose four of eight questions to respond to (above). The questions pertained to themes shared with The Great Gatsby; as such, the task was highly formative and advanced the learning objectives of this comparative unit (focus areas: 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4).
Originally I had planned for students to do a creative writing response task--a R.A.F.T. (see unit plan)--to consolidate their understanding of the film. However, time constraints meant homework questions were more practical. In the future I would prefer to engage students in a more authentic learning experience for their formative assessment (focus areas: 2.1, 3.6).
Nevertheless, students' responses gave me insight into their level of understanding and also misconceptions they had about the film. One misconception, for instance, was that the colour red symbolises innocence. I addressed such misconceptions in class and provided students with written constructive feedback to develop their analytical skills (focus areas: 5.1, 5.2, 5.4).
Below is a sample of one student's responses along with my feedback. This student produced exceptional work so my feedback is mainly encouragement.
Stills analysis task
The second formative exercise was a film stills analysis task. Students worked in small groups to identify film techniques and themes at play in their designated still, as well as comment on how it develops character and connects with The Great Gatsby. This is where students started drawing on their knowledge of Gatsby to make intertextual connections and it was pleasing to see them make their own connections with little teacherly guidance.
After half an hour of collaboration, groups presented their still commentary to the class. This exercise required students to engage with visual literacy, social capability, and higher order thinking skills: they had to discuss, analyse, synthesise and be accountable for their learning (focus areas: 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.5, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1)
See student work samples below, which were afterwards uploaded to the class intranet for students to review later.
Item 5:Formative tasks - comparing American Beauty and The Great Gatsby
Venn Diagrams
In the previous exercise I had prompted students to start considering links between American Beauty film stills and Gatsby. The next phase was to have them brainstorming intertexual connections around prominent themes (which the students had also come up with) (focus area: 3.2). For this, I used Venn diagrams, which are an effective tool for spatially conceiving the overlap between texts (focus area: 3.4).
I printed out A3 Venn diagrams and students passed them clockwise around the room, so multiple groups contributed to each. In hindsight a little more time spent on this exercise (such that all groups contributed to every diagram) and a follow-up discussion would have made this task more valuable (focus area: 3.6). As it was, the diagrams were uploaded to the class intranet to become a resource for essay planning, though how many students used them as a resource I cannot say.
Close reading
Before planning their essays, I wanted students to re-visit The Great Gatsby and some of its key passages with their learning from American Beauty in mind. To scaffold this process, I selected 30 salient passages from Gatsby and dedicated a lesson to close reading, with an emphasis on language features, themes and intertextuality. I modeled this process first, challenged students to expose themselves to as many quotes as possible, then distributed print-outs for students to annotate (focus areas: 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4).
As with the Venn diagrams, students passed these around the room, therefore gaining exposure to a variety of passages. Afterward, I asked students to select the passage which most struck them as connecting with American Beauty. Fruitful class discussion ensued, during which it was clear students were recalibrating their understanding of Gatsby in relation to new understandings of the American Dream offered by the film. This was the sort of follow-up discussion I ought to have facilitated with my previous activity as it was an effective way of consolidating and assessing understanding (focus areas: 3.6, 5.1).
Class hypothesis 'bank'
A final formative task before essay planning consisted in creating an hypothesis 'bank', where students had to come up with an hypothesis about how the two texts are meaningfully connected using a table of themes and techniques to guide them (focus areas: 3.3, 3.4, 3.5).
This process--having an hypothesis and testing it--is the basis of all academic inquiry. I encouraged students to be as creative or outlandish as they wanted. The purpose being to have students independently frame thesis statements, accuracy wasn't required. However, I made sure students understood these thesis statements would have to be tested by re-examining both texts.
I framed this task as per below, using a Google Doc which all students could edit (focus area: 2.6). Students for the most part made interesting and meaningful connections, however the Google Doc also afforded the opportunity for plenty of intra-classroom banter, and for this reason I haven't included the students' responses below. It is also for this reason that I would avoid using Google Docs in the future. Instead, I'd have students compose hypotheses privately and post to a class forum afterward (thus foreclosing the potential for posts to be tampered with).
The second phase of this exercise had students read through other class members' hypotheses, vote on their favourite and explain why. Through this and previous formative tasks, the process of learning and formulating essay responses was truly collaborative. The benefits of collaboration are expressed by Gommans et al (2015): 'Working together with peers on a task offers many opportunities to ask questions, explain and justify opinions, articulate reasoning, and elaborate and reflect upon individual and shared knowledge'. (p. 599)
Item 6: Summative work - scaffolding, modeling conferencing, drafting
Essay questions
My mentor wanted students to write an essay for their summative task and SACE circumscribes a maximum word count of 1,000 words for intertextual written responses. The below task sheet displaying essay questions and criteria was the result of collaboration with my mentor (focus area: 6.3). Q. 1 is a generic question which is inherently differentiated, allowing students to select the theme/s they want to explore (focus areas: 1.5, 1.6, 2.3).
The other three questions were whittled down from my original six (see unit plan), and it was pleasing to see some students tackle questions 3 and 4, which I devised to be meta (re: the scope and ethics of art as such) and intellectually challenging (focus area: 1.5. I found students who opted for questions 2-4 needed extra guidance in formulating their essay responses, however this is by no means a reason not to include extension or enrichment opportunities. On the contrary, these are important ways of differentiating for student readiness (Doubet & Hockett, 2015).
This phase of the unit saw some team teaching take place, as my mentor, with her solid grasp of SACE requirements, wanted to scaffold the comparative essay writing process using previous students' work which, colour-coded, modeled the optimum way to structure these essays. Modeling is known to be a highly effective teaching strategy (Haston, 2007). I was happy to sit and be a student for this phase, needing this process to be modeled to me too!
Conferencing
One of the highlights of this unit, and indeed my whole placement, was getting to sit down one-on-one with students and discuss their essay ideas (focus areas: 1.3, 1.5). During the essay-planning phase, I circulated the room and reached most students (aided by having two teachers in the room).
I devised a method whereby, almost like a therapist, I mind-mapped students' thoughts as they verbalised them, using questioning to guide the connections they were making. Conferencing is a great tool of differentiated and inclusive teaching and learning, and these were very much student-driven conversations. My purpose was to guide thought processes and gauge student understanding, not tell students what to think (Black, 1998). Mind-maps are also a great way of brainstorming, recording, visualising and organising ideas. The mind maps here operated as a records of the conferencing sessions (I wasn't simply doing the work for them). In the future, I'd encourage students to do their own mind-mapping as a planning strategy (focus areas 1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.5, 3.4, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 4.1, 5.1).
Students found this process highly constructive (see mentor comment below) and wanted to keep the maps we made together; as such, I've replicated an example of the mind-mapping (below).
As a result of all the formative work and scaffolding in this unit, students crafted their essays with relative ease. Given the complexity of intertextual study and the texts themselves, I can attribute student success with their end products at least in part to the teaching strategies and sequencing of learning tasks planned for and implemented in this unit.
Although my placement ended before the unit concluded, I was able to draft some students' essays and read their final submissions. Please see Evidence Set 4: SACE Stage 1 Essay Drafting in Standard 5 to view my editing and comments on a student's essay draft.
Final notes on the implementation of this unit
The positive student feedback, observable transformations in student thoughts and opinions, and their ability to produce well structured and well argued essays point to the overall success of this unit.
My original plan proved a helpful guide, but I found in the process of implementing the plan I had to be responsive to student needs; as such, many ad hoc decisions were made regarding formative work at the advice of my mentor.
To make this unit more intellectually challenging, I would like to have integrated critical perspectives into the final summative task, as the students were interested in and seemed ready for the Critical Race Theory I briefly introduced them to (focus area: 3.6).
I would also like to have done more work around the hypothesis bank, having students do a follow up task which had them review both texts and either justify or debunk their hypothesis. However, time constraints are real and I'm sure there's no such thing as the perfect implementation of a unit.
Ultimately, I learned much about what to do and what not to do in the process of designing, implementing and reflecting upon this unit, and will build upon the lessons learned here in my future teaching practice.
Standards Covered:
1.1 Physical, social and intellectual development and characteristics of students
Proficient: Use teaching strategies based on knowledge of students' physical, social and intellectual development and characteristics to improve student learning.
1.2 Understand how students learn
Proficient: Structure teaching programs using research and collegial advice about how students learn
1.3 Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds
Proficient: Design and implement teaching strategies that are responsive to the learning strengths and needs of students from diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds
1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities
Proficient: Develop teaching activities that incorporate differentiated strategies to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities
1.6 Strategies to support full participation of students with disability
Proficient: Design and implement teaching activities that support the participation and learning of students with disability and address relevant policy and legislative requirements.
2.1 Content and teaching strategies of the teaching area
Proficient: Apply knowledge of the content and teaching strategies of the teaching area to develop engaging teaching activities
2.2 Content selection and organisation
Proficient: Organise content into coherent, well-sequenced learning and teaching programs
2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting
Proficient: Design and implement learning and teaching programs using knowledge of curriculum, assessment and reporting requirements.
2.5 Literacy and numeracy strategies
Proficient: Apply knowledge and understanding of effective teaching strategies to support students' literacy and numeracy achievement
2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
Proficient: Use effective teaching strategies to integrate ICT into learning and teaching programs to make selected content relevant and meaningful.
3.1 Establish challenging learning goals
Proficient: Set explicit, challenging and achievable goals for all students
3.2 Plan, structure and sequence learning programs
Proficient: Plan and implement well-structured learning and teaching programs or lesson sequences that engage students and promote learning
3.3 Use teaching strategies
Proficient: Select and use relevant teaching strategies to develop knowledge, skills, problem solving and critical and creative thinking
3.4 Select and use teaching resources
Proficient: Select and/or create and use a range of resources, including ICT to engage students in their learning
3.5 Use effective classroom communication
Proficient: Use effective verbal and non-verbal communication strategies to support student understanding, participation, engagement and achievement
3.6 Evaluate and improve teaching programs
Proficient: Evaluate personal teaching and learning programs using evidence, including feedback from students and student assessment data, to inform planning
4.1 Support student participation
Proficient: Establish and implement inclusive and positive interactions to engage and support all students in classroom activities
5.1 Assess student learning
Proficient: Develop, select and use informal and formal diagnostic, formative and summative assessment strategies to assess student learning.
5.2 Provide feedback to students on their learning
Proficient: Provide timely effective and appropriate feedback to students about their achievement relative to their learning goals
5.4 Interpret student data
Proficient: Use student assessment data to analyse and evaluate student understanding of subject/content, identifying interventions and modifying teaching practice
References:
Black, L. (1998). Between talk and teaching reconsidering the writing conference. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press.
Doubet, K., & Hockett, J. (2015). Differentiation in Middle and High School : Strategies to Engage All Learners. Alexandria: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Gargiulo, R., & Metcalf, Deborah J. (2017). Teaching in today's inclusive classrooms : A universal design for learning approach (Third ed.).
Gommans, R., Segers, E., Burk, W., & Scholte, R. (2015). The Role of Perceived Popularity on Collaborative Learning: A Dyadic Perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 599-608.
Haston, W. (2007). Teacher Modelling as an Effective Teaching Strategy. Music Educators Journal, 94(4), 26-30.