Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Lesson Plan - Shehnaz

Lesson: Characterization in Charlotte’s Web by E.B White

Lesson duration: 60 minutes

Students: Secondary 1, Normal Academic, Low Ability

Class Profile: Visual Learners

Venue: Classroom

Pre-requisites: Students have read the book Charlotte’s Web.

Lesson Objectives: By the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

1) Describe accurately 3 characters in the excerpt chosen with evidence through a worksheet provided

2) Identify, describe and give evidence for similarities and differences between 2 characters in the excerpt chosen through a worksheet provided

3) Discuss how they relate to 1 character in the book through a reflection and class discussion

05 min

Class to settle down.

Teacher will ask some students to identify the different characters and name the hero and the villain in Charlotte’s Web.

Teacher gives instructions on the class activities.

Class will be divided into 8 groups of 5 students. There are 8 excerpts from the book. Each group is to choose 1 excerpt.

25 min

Each group is to paraphrase the excerpt in their own words to aid understanding in 5 minutes using typewith.me. Singlish is accepted.

Students will then have to describe 3 characters and give evidence from the excerpt on an individual worksheet.

Students will also have to identify 2 characters in the excerpt and give 2 similarities and 2 differences between them in the worksheet provided

Worksheet will be handed up after 25min.

10 min

Teacher will move on to the next activity.

Teacher will state that he/she relates to the character Charlotte from the book and give reasons for doing so.

All students to write a short 5 minute reflection to state how and why they are able to relate to one character in the book

20 min

Some students will be called out to share with the class how and why they are able to relate to one character.

Points will be noted on the whiteboard

All students are to hand up their reflections

This lesson plan is designed around the normal academic class that I taught in Yio Chu Kang Secondary. The students are really weak. They have no ideas of their own due to the lack of reading and requires many scaffolding questions. At times, these guiding questions are insufficient as they need a thorough breakdown of the questions to the simplest language. Teaching literature to such students can be tough. It ought to be noted that these students are those that several teachers have given up upon. However, when shown enough care and concern, they will listen and they sometimes come up with brilliant ideas or analysis of characters without realizing that they have made a good point. They fight for praise from the teacher and are willing to learn if they like the teacher. Thus, my job is to expose them to different ideas, different ways of learning (although they may not realize it through discussions) and for them to develop reflective skills as this is something they really lack. These students have low self esteem and one of them told me that he wants to be a bus driver like his father when he grows up because he is unsure of what education can do for him.

That said, this lesson plan on characterization is centered around Paulo Freire’s “dialogic education”. In the first half of the lesson, students are grouped and will paraphrase one of the eight excerpts provided in their own words. The usage of the collaborative platform typewith.me allows students who are normally quiet in class to have ample opportunity to voice out their thoughts. Here, students will discuss and interact with one another as to how they will paraphrase the scene in a manner that makes sense to them. The usage of Singlish is allowed as these students are of low ability and this activity will allow these students to make use of their background to paraphrase this scene. It allows students to create meaning out of this scene and the language used will be simple and easy to understand. This not only encourages individuals to speak up, but to work together as a group to come up with a document collaboratively. By the next lesson, these documents will be printed and placed on the class notice board as a form of Gallery Sharing amongst the students. These collaborative pieces are expected to be witty and amusing, something that they can read this at their own time.

After the first activity, students would have understood the excerpts provided in greater detail as they have engaged with the excerpt and meaning making. The second activity allows students to reaffirm this knowledge by answering simple questions that engages the excerpt provided. At the same time, the worksheet will allow the teacher to assess the students’ understanding and how they engage with the text. The manner in which they describe the characters would ensure that the basic inference skills are in place as the students would have to include evidence from the text itself to support what they are saying. In addition, students would have to come up with similarities and differences for two characters of their choice. This ensures that they have the basic lower order thinking skills.

The third activity would allow students to relate to the characters in the book. The students are expected to reflect on their own characteristics and relate it to the characters in the book. A minority of students are expected to partake in the class discussion as there are few confident speakers in this class. Therefore, students are required to write a short reflection on a piece of paper which will allow all students to voice out their thoughts. It makes for more meaningful learning and students will be able to grasp characterization in a process that is inclusive even with their diverse background. A dialogic classroom is indeed important and teaching the students to reflect would be the first step to a dialogic classroom. In time to come, perhaps more lively discussions could take place once they realize that writing on a piece of paper and engaging in class discussion is similar and definitely a faster way to air their thoughts.

2 comments:

  1. Dear Shehnaz

    I think you matched your lesson activities very well with your target audience. Your lesson plan takes their abilities and limitations into account. Quite often, teachers are not aware of the students' abilities and match activities which may be too hard for them. The result is a disappointed teacher and students losing interest in the subject :( So i feel you did a great job catering your activities to this group of NA students.

    I also like the opportunities you created for the students to be comfortable to share their thoughts. For example, i noticed you allowed Singlish to be used for the typewith.me. activity. This puts students at ease and i think they will be less self-conscious and guarded when sharing their thoughts. Quite often, low ability students do not dare to share their thoughts as they are worried their language will fail them.

    I also like how you allow them to share their thoughts and feelings towards the characters. I think it helps them relate to the characters better and through sharing amongst their peers, reflect and consider other perspectives.

    My overall feel when reading your lesson plan is that you are a teacher who cares about creating a comfortable and safe environment for students to learn :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shehnaz, you have a heartfelt desire to help students who are often written off as incapable of doing literature because of the "language barrier." I wish there were more teachers like you who would continue to fight the good fight. It's not easy. And here are some more thoughts on the possible difficulties you might encounter in carrying out this lesson plan:

    1) Would your "low-ability" students (maybe we should do away with such terms as "low-ability"?) have read Charlotte's Web from start to finish and understood it before your lesson? Would they all be interested in this text as secondary one students? What kinds of learners (based on social background, gender, class, home language, ethnicity, etc.) would such a text more readily appeal to in terms of its subject and themes?

    2) Did your initial paraphrasing task take more than 5 minutes? Was it an individual or group task? What is gained or lost when this linguistic task is accomplished individually versus collaboratively?

    3) What is the purpose of paraphrasing the text in WRITING? Why can't they explain the passage in their own SPOKEN words? If you are focusing on writing skills, why allow for non-academic forms of writing such as Singlish? And if you ARE sponsoring Singlish as a legitimate writing style, how would this radical approach be consistent with Freire's position in PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED?

    4) What if students can't relate to the text because they cannot understand it? What if they can't relate to the text simply because it's not culturally relevant to them? How did you justify your choice of Charlotte's Web for this particular class of students? And if the school had designated it as a compulsory text, would you have resisted and questioned your HOD's authority? On what grounds?

    5) You want your students to be confident speakers in class, which is a good thing. Question: where does that self-confidence to speak come from? If you're emphasizing "fluency" over "accuracy," I can see why you would encourage the use of non-standard English. In fact, I would even go so far as to authorize the use of Malay, Chinese, and Indian? But after that, then what...?

    You are tackling very deep issues related to the challenges of what some people call "culturally sensitive pedagogy." What works best for certain students has a lot to do with their cultural-linguistic backgrounds, their personal interests and experiences, their peer dynamics, their relationship with you as a teacher (and with other teachers), etc. etc.

    Teaching is a TOUGH job!

    ReplyDelete