Recent Question/Assignment

2.5.2 Assessment 2 - Lesson Plan Analysis
Weight: 50%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: 12th May by 11pm
Submission: Electronic submission through Turnitin
Format: MS Word document
Length: 2,000 words
Curriculum Mode: Professional Task
Please note, word/time limits are +/- 10% of the total listed. Marking will be based on these limits. Any words/time over the limit will not be marked.
ASSIGNMENT 2: LESSON PLAN ANALYSIS, REVISION & JUSTIFICATION
This assignment asks you to analyse a lesson plan to determine its strengths and weaknesses for curriculum, pedagogy, resources, and assessment (Outcomes 1, 2, 5,7). You are then asked to modify the lesson plan to achieve improved teaching and learning outcomes for students and to provide an evidence-based justification for these changes (Outcomes 3, 4, 6, 8). Finally, you upload this assignment to your Learning Portfolio under a relevant heading (note this is a threshold criterion and you cannot pass the assessment without completing it).
ASSESSMENT INSTRUCTIONS
In this second assignment, you will modify an existing secondary lesson plan. Your modifications will be guided by an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the lesson plan. You’ll also provide an academic justification for the modifications. Finally, you’ll submit the assignment to Turnitin and upload it to your Learning Portfolio.
PART A - LOCATING A LESSON PLAN
1. Choose a lesson plan from the Assessment 2 folder on vUWS.
– 1714 students: Choose a lesson plan from one of your KLAs
– 1848 students: Choose a lesson plan from the PBL folder as these integrate STEM KLAs
PART B - ANALYSING AND MODIFYING THE LESSON PLAN (~1,250 words)
1. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the lesson plan in terms of pedagogical approaches and inclusion of diverse learning needs.
2. Modify the lesson plan to achieve the four improvements. We mainly expect changes to the teaching, learning, and assessment activities (not the outcomes listed). Highlight the changes you’ve made to the lesson plan. You will need to present one teaching strategy/modification to the class for peer feedback only in the last tutorial of the unit in week 9. Each micro-teaching strategy will be presented to a small group for peer feedback only. This micro-teaching segment will be approximately 3- 5 mins in duration. You may choose to use your own ICT device to record your own teaching segment for reflection.
PART C - ACADEMIC JUSTIFICATION (750-1000 WORDS)
1. Write a 750-word academic justification for your modifications to the lesson plan. In your justification, explain how the modifications achieve the improvements. You should also support your arguments with relevant scholarly sources. What evidence of best-practice is there for your modifications? You can use course readings as evidence but you should also conduct your own research in academic journals. A minimum of three peerreviewed journal articles are required. Be sure to cite your sources and include a reference list, formatting both according to APA 6th Style.
SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
Submit a digital copy of your assignment by the due date/time to the Turnitin portal in the Assignment 2 folder on vUWS. No paper copy is required. Your submission must include (in this order in a single word document):
1. Title page with your name, student number, and a heading like ”English Lesson Plan Analysis and Revision”
(i.e. indicate which KLA you’ve chosen).
2. Lesson plan analysis
3. Modified lesson plan (with your specific changes highlighted in yellow)
4. Academic justification.
5. Reference list.
6. URL web link to your Learning Portfolio.
Do not include the original lesson plan as part of your submission.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
We take academic integrity very seriously in this unit. You must not engage in cheating, plagiarism, collusion, or other forms of academic misconduct. Students suspected of infringements against the Student Misconduct Rule, made under authority of the Western Sydney University Act 1997 (NSW), will be reported to the Deputy Dean, School of Education. Sanctions for misconduct range from receiving zero for an assessment, failing the unit, and being excluded from the University.
Marking Criteria:
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
PARTS A & B /20
Analyses and modifies the lesson plan. 9-10
Excellent analysis of
the lesson plan using the QT model. No
misapplication of the elements.
Critical
improvements identified. 7-8
Very good analysis of the lesson plan using the QT model. Occasional minor misapplication of the elements. Highly relevant improvements identified. 6
Good analysis of the lesson plan using the QT model. Frequent minor misapplication of the elements. Mostly relevant improvements identified. 3-5
Satisfactory analysis of the lesson plan using the QT model. Occasional major misapplication of the elements. Basic improvements identified. 0-2
Unsatisfactory analysis of the
lesson plan using the QT
model. Frequent major misapplication of the elements. No improvements identified.
9-10
Excellent modifications to lesson plan that completely achieve the identified improvements. 7-8
Very good modifications to the lesson plan that
achieve the identified improvements. 6
Good modifications to the lesson plan that achieve most of the identified improvements. 3-5
Satisfactory modifications to the lesson plan that
achieve some of the
identified improvements. 0-2
Unsatisfactory modifications to the lesson plan that do
not achieve the
identified improvements.
PART C /20
Justifies
modifications with academic rigor. 13-15
Justifies the modifications to improve the lesson plan in relation to the QT model, with frequent and critical reference to best practice. 10-12
Explains how the modifications improve the lesson plan according to the QT model, with
frequent reference to best practice. 7-9
Describes how the modifications improve the lesson plan according to the QT model, with
consistent reference to best practice. 5-6
Identifies the improvements to the lesson plan according
to the QT model, with occasional reference to best practice. 0-4
Does not or
inadequately identifies the improvements to the lesson plan according to the QT model. Does
not reference best practice.
5
Frequent and critical use of evidence from a wide range of
scholarly sources, incl. own research. 4
Frequent use of evidence from a
wide range of
scholarly sources, incl. own research. 3
Consistent use of evidence from a range of scholarly sources provided in
course readings. 2
Some use of evidence from a restricted range of scholarly sources provided in course readings. 0-1
No evidence used to support arguments or evidence is not from scholarly sources.
ACADEMIC
WRITING /10
Literacy Skills and
APA Referencing 5
No errors with spelling, grammar, punctuation, sentence or paragraph construction. 4
Occasional minor errors with spelling,
grammar, punctuation, sentence and/or paragraph construction. 3
Frequent minor errors with spelling,
grammar, punctuation, sentence and/or paragraph construction. 2
Occasional major errors with spelling,
grammar, punctuation, sentence and/or paragraph construction. 0-1
Frequent major errors with spelling,
grammar, punctuation, sentence and/or paragraph construction.
5
No errors in reference list or in-text citations. 4
Occasional minor errors in reference list and/or in-text citations. 3
Frequent minor errors in reference list and/or in-text citations. 2
Occasional major errors in reference list and/or in-text citations. 0-1
No errors in reference list or in-text citations.
LEARNING PORTFOLIO**
Creates a Learning Portfolio and uploads evidence to it.
**thresholdThis is a
criterion for this assessment task. – – – SATISFACTORY
Has created a
Learning Portfolio
in
Weebly and uploaded
Assignment 2 under
a relevant APST standard. UNSATISFACTORY
Has not created a Learning Portfolio in
Weebly and/or has not uploaded Assignment 2 under
a relevant APST standard.
Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Unsatisfactory
MICROTEACHING
** SATISFACTORY
Has participated in a micro-teaching session. UNSATISFACTORY
Has not participated in a micro-teaching session.