Lesson Plans
Each semester, I have had two lesson plans that I submitted to ENGL388V before presenting them. While I taught several lessons over the course of both semesters, these were the ones that I have written to be recreated. Below are both plans, one from each semester, along with my thoughts on the lessons themselves.
Spring 2022 Plan - Refutation
This lesson plan was developed after noticing that students struggled with refutation paragraphs and counter arguments in their Position Papers.
The Lesson Plan
Objective: After this lesson, students will be able to write their own counterargument paragraphs for their upcoming Position Papers. Additionally, they will have chance to practice source integration.
Materials: Students will not need to explicitly prepare anything. A few weeks ago, they did a discussion board centered around counterarguments, so they have background coming into the activity. I will have quotes prepared by cutting them into strips. Each group of students will receive the same set of quotes. I will also be projecting a PowerPoint that I will briefly lecture with, and then provide a QR code to the PowerPoint for students to access the quotes digitally if they wish.
Time Estimate: The lesson is designed to take approximately 15-20 minutes.
Outline of Lesson:
I will begin class as I usually do, by asking a lighter question not necessarily related to English as a “question of the day.” This takes about five minutes. This slide is the first in the PowerPoint.
Then, I will move into the lecture portion of the class. First, I will describe the purpose of a counterargument paragraph. I find that this is helpful because many students don’t always realize how important it can be to an argument.
I will then relate its structure to the confirmation paragraphs we have been learning about. Students are already familiar with the confirmation paragraph structure, so the jump from one to the other is less dramatic than outlining an entirely new structure.
For the final part of the lecture portion, I will point out the most common logical fallacies that I see employed in Position Papers, particularly the straw man. I think this isn’t because students are lazy, but because they are worried that a strong opposing argument will weaken their argument. My point in doing this is reminding them that is not the case.
Next, we will move into the activity. I will divide students into groups of 3-4 students and pass out a set of quotes. I will also have a QR code up on the board for students to access the PowerPoint, which has the quotes on the remaining slides. The idea is that they will be answering the question: Is the Internet making us stupid? They are allowed to take any position they would like. I am allowing them to say a simple yes or no, but I am also providing them with a slide of potential arguments that respond to specific parts of those pro-con sides. They will choose two sources, one supporting their argument, one opposing. They will then add their own analysis to connect them. This will all be done verbally, because I did not see the value in physically writing the paragraph, I thought it would be better to discuss the overall structure.
I will circulate while they are in groups to answer any questions.
Finally, we will come back together as a large group and each small group will share the quotes they chose and how they created a juxtaposition for a counterargument. I will end by asking what questions students have.
Method of assessing the objective: The activity built into the lesson plan is the main method of assessing the objective, because students will actually be practicing the skills they need. However, my professor and I will also gauge the success of the lesson when reading the counterargument paragraphs in their Position Papers.
My Thoughts
When deciding what type of lesson plan to do around counter arguments, I thought back to my previous semesters as a TA to think about what students struggled with. Primarily, they did not bring in two sources and juxtapose them against each other. So, I created this activity. In practice, I think it went pretty well. Students seemed engaged and asked questions that indicated they were understanding what I was getting at. The activity was successful because it really feels like they understand how to juxtapose sources better. The lesson plan itself went well, as I didn’t stumble over anything in the lecture portion. The only element I would change is that when it came time to pass out the quotes, I completely forgot to put the QR code slide up for students to scan. This meant that only one person could be reading a quote at a time, because it was on paper. This is something I would make sure to come back to if I were to do it again. Overall, I’m very happy with how it went, and hopefully it will result in stronger counter argument paragraphs.
Spring 2021 Plan - Outlining
This lesson plan was developed to prepare students for the upcoming outline assignment, which I also created. I have included the details of the assignment I was preparing them for, and the plan itself.
The Assignment
This assignment will be done in two parts. First, you will complete a sentence outline during class that presents three distinct positions within your issue and use stasis theory to connect the arguments. The sentence outline portion of the assignment will be due at 11:59 PM of the day you work on it in class (3/31). Then, you will use what you have created on your outline to turn this work into a paper.
Your sentence outline (to be completed in class) should include
-
Your topic
-
At least three background facts about your topic (using evidence)
-
The exigency of your issue
-
Three distinct positions on your topic, with evidence (this means sources!) and analysis to support each position. Reference the Sample Sentence Outline for an idea of what this can look like.
-
You can make this part of your outline as bare as you'd like. As long as you have three bullet points (one that indicates the position, one that indicates evidence that supports the position, and one that indicates a piece of analysis that responds to/engages with the evidence) you'll be fine. Return to the TEA paragraphing approach for what to include in this part of the outline--i.e., at least one bullet point for the topic sentence (position), one for evidence, and one for analysis.
-
-
The stasis category of each of your positions
-
A key that shows where your parenthetical citations are from. You do not need to have formal MLA citations due to time constraints, but you should have parenthetical citations as if they were connected to a Works Cited Page. Instead of a Works Cited Page, you will have a list of the sources you used. You can provide web addresses, names of sources, or any other identifier that lets us see which sources you are using without taking the time to format an MLA citation. Because you will have the formal MLA citation for your scholarly source(s) from your Annotated Bibliography, feel free to make use of that. Do not worry about alphabetical order for this informal list.
-
At least one of your sources should be scholarly and at least one of your sources should be popular.
Feel free to use the Sample Sentence Outline as a guide, but please do not feel like you need to use the exact format as the sample.
The Lesson Plan
Objective: After this lesson, students should be able to successfully complete the outline assignment and have a better understanding of how this assignment fits into the overall course progression towards their semester Position Paper.
Materials: This lesson was entirely conducted over Zoom. I had a PowerPoint that I presented with screenshare, and a Sample Outline that I pulled up during the class. Before class, I had students watch the pilot of a TV show of their choice and take notes on how much of the episode was background versus plot.
Time Estimate: The lesson takes about 50 minutes, or an entire class period.
Outline of Lesson:
1. Question of the Day: each day, I start class with an opening question that has nothing to do with English. This is to get students talking and possibly turning their cameras on. :00-:05
2. Slides 2 – 5: Focus on organizing all the good ideas, working on flow, making sure evidence fits with your argument and analysis. :05-:12
3. Slides 6 – 7: Discuss last night’s homework. Give example of how Michael Scott’s mug is both background and tells us valuable information about his character. Emphasize sources are necessary with background information. Consider what background is interesting but not actually necessary. :12-:19
4. Slides 8 – 9: With 30 Rock example, point out that different stakeholders will have vastly different positions. Emphasize issues are not binary! Go into the requirements for the outline on Slide 9. :19-:25
5. Slide 10: Breakout rooms where they discuss what positions they might have on their own research topic. Move through breakout rooms to monitor discussion. :25-:33
6. Slides 11 – 12: Look at sample outline at this point, but make sure they know their outline can be arranged differently. Remind them to use existing research, not start from scratch. Make sure they understand the progression from outline to paper, and how it should be helpful to them, not just busywork. :33-:45
7. Explain exactly what will happen on the in-class outline during the next class period to make sure they understand. Open up the floor for questions and final announcements from professor. :45-:50
Method of assessing the objective: Students will be completing the in-class sentence outline during the next class, and that will assess how well they understood this lesson’s objective.
My Thoughts
To develop this plan, I relied heavily on one of the very first sources I ever read in ENGL388V, Chickering and Gamson's "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education." While these tips might seem obvious, they set a standard that I find comforting. Of the seven, my personal favorite is "encourages active learning." To me, this is especially important in the virtual environment, where we can never be sure if the black boxes on Zoom actually have attentive students on the other end. Not to mention, I happen to think that active learning is much more entertaining as a student. Another source I consulted was Warnock's blog post about teaching online. Even though it was written in 2006, it still calms the initial panic for instructors about not having the flexibility of teaching face-to-face. It certainly made me feel much better about having to deliver my lesson to a Zoom room. Both of these sources set me on the right path towards confidence for the duration of my lesson plan.
The lesson went very well in my humble opinion. The opening question did get decent participation, which has been lacking this late in the semester. Moving into the lecture portion of the class, I actually went more quickly than I had anticipated. This is largely because I do not love lecturing without an idea of how students are receiving the material. So, while I gave ample opportunities for questions, I moved rather quickly. This ended up working out for the best, because they used that time in their breakout rooms. If I were to deliver this lesson again, I would adjust my timing accordingly. Also, I would probably bring out the Sample Outline throughout the lesson, instead of only towards the end. I did not want them to think that my sample was the only way to complete the assignment, but at least one sample could have been useful for some students who prefer to be given a structure. Students enjoyed the relatability of the sitcoms, and they participated well in groups. Finally, when they turned in their outlines, they were mostly very strong. Even better, they seemed prepared for the paper following the outline, and were organized going into that. To me, this says that they were able to apply the skills beyond my lesson, which is my ultimate goal. Each time a student can find my teaching useful beyond its immediate assignment is when I feel most successful.
Fall 2020 Plan - Revision
This lesson plan was developed after feedback from my professor that we could emphasize the revision process more overall, instead of focusing on peer review exclusively. The resulting lesson plan covers pre-writing, peer review, and revision.
The Lesson Plan
Objective: After this lesson, students will be able to understand the difference between writing, revising, and peer editing. They will leave with concrete tools to help each of these processes. Additionally, they will have chance to practice all three in an activity.
Materials: The class will be delivered over Zoom. Students will not need to read anything in advance. Their main preparation is to have recently completed a peer review, which they will have to do anyway. I plan to deliver the lesson just after a peer review so it is most effective. I will present this PowerPoint,, with documents embedded. Also, I will put the papers they need to edit in a Google Doc.
Time Estimate: The lesson is designed to take the entire 50-minute class period.
Outline of Lesson:
1. I will begin class as I usually do, by asking a lighter question not necessarily related to English. This gets the class “warmed up” and ready to listen or discuss. This usually takes about five minutes.
2. Then, after a brief overview of the class for the day, I will go through the first document, Bringing it all Together. This is a document I created that gives tips on how to go from research to actually writing a paper. I intend for this to take 5-10 minutes.
3. After that, I will go through the second document, Peer Editing Strategies. While this is primarily lecture-based, I will ask if students have any strategies on the page that they particularly find effective or any that they are not comfortable with. Again, this will take about 5-10 minutes.
4. Next, I will go over the third document, Revision Strategies. I will discuss how revision is different from simply taking peer review into account. I will ask students to explain how the two are different. We will discuss how often they use revision without peer review, as I anticipate that they do not do it often. I plan for this to be 5-10 minutes.
5. Once I have gone through all three documents, I want to go through an activity where students can practice these skills. First, I will have them consider what thesis they could give for their upcoming position paper. How would they outline their paragraphs? What introduction could they use to draw their reader in? Next, we will practice peer review. I will use the Rhetorical Analysis draft I wrote in ENGL101 last semester and have them peer edit it in a shared Google Doc. Finally, I will show them my final draft of the Rhetorical Analysis I turned in. I will ask them what they think I improved on, and also what could still be improved on. This will also be in a Google Doc. I will culminate in demonstrating that this activity helped separate the three parts of the writing process. I intend for this activity to take about 20 minutes.
6. To close the class, I will ask them how this class will affect their approach to the writing process in the hopes that they find the class useful. I will be sure to be specific in my questioning to avoid vague non-questions. If they have any lingering questions, I will answer them. This last portion will take about 5 minutes.
Method of assessing the objective: After I have gone through the “lecture” portion of the class, I will use the activity where we practice the skills I refer to in the lecture. I will assess how well they grasp the concept by how they complete the activity. If they seem unsure about it, I will address any concerns. Also, at the end of class, I will do a quick survey of how this lesson is going to affect their writing.
My Thoughts
When preparing for this lesson plan, I found the readings about grading particularly interesting. Initially, I had planned to have them complete a practice assignment on their own after class. However, I decided that while it was a low stakes assignment, it would not necessarily be valuable enough to do alone. Instead, it would be better to bounce ideas off of one another in the synchronous class. Another element I took into account was breakout rooms. In 388V, I think the general feeling of them is that they can be very ineffective. While we have used breakout rooms in my class a lot pretty well, I decided that this activity would be better in the larger group. Additionally, sometimes my Zoom does not let me move through the breakout rooms, and I did not want technology to limit the feedback I could give. Finally, I reviewed Napell’s "Six Common Non-Facilitating Teaching Behaviors" so that I could ensure that I would not plan an activity where I use any of them. This was useful to me when planning my closing because I was able to specifically note that I would ask questions that were not so vague that students just sat and didn’t know what to say. Overall, these resources and class discussions came together so that I could form a cohesive lesson plan.
Looking back at how the lesson plan went, I was very pleasantly surprised. Firstly, I was shocked at how nervous I was. Even though I had led several activities at this point, somehow, having to deliver my own creation made me much more anxious. Despite that, I think the lesson was still effective and did its job. If I had to deliver it again, I would definitely alter the activity with practice, as it felt very rushed. This semester, I did alter the plan to be an asynchronous module. I took my individual resources on pre-writing, peer review, and revision (the three linked above), and had students read through them. Then, I had an ELMS "quiz," which was not actually a quiz, just an extra credit grade, set up to ask them one thing they learned from each of the three pages. I knew that they might skim through the documents trying to find something to put on the quiz, but this is exactly what I wanted, as even a brief skim would be helpful. Both delivery methods of this plan were successful in my eyes, and I have continued to refer my students to these documents throughout both semesters.