IZT Task 3 WGU Learning Theories Lesson Plan PDF

Preview

Summary

IZT Task 3 WGU Learning Theories Lesson Plan...

Description

Amanda Lindeman Task 3 Lesson Plan and Analysis November 11, 2020 A. Personal Beliefs It is my belief that the best student learning takes place when you take the best practices of each learning theory and use them to improve the learning experience. I believe there are strengths and weakness to each of the learning theories. They each have the potential to benefit our students, and help us, as teachers, meet their needs. As far as Behaviorism theory is concerned, I believe in using operant conditioning to help shape the behavior of students in order to encourage the behavior and skills I would like students to demonstrate. An effective classroom manager knows that in order to have an environment conducive to learning, disruptive behaviors need to be kept in check. It is also important to encourage the development of desired behaviors and skills. I also believe in the extensive use of positive reinforcement. Students are more likely to perform better and behave better with a combination of high expectations and positive reinforcement that shows appreciation when students make good choices. However, in my opinion, behaviorism is flawed in the sense that it only focuses on voluntary behavior and external, observable stimuli and results (Snowman & McCown, 2015) and doesn’t account for internal stimuli, thoughts, and feelings, which I feel has a huge impact on a student’s ability to learn. Cognitivism attempts to take behaviorism one step further by focusing on the role of the brain and internal processing in learning (Snowman & McCown, 2015). In order to teach our students, we have to know how their brains work so we can best determine appropriate ways to facilitate their learning. To me cognitivism is theory of learning that I most identify with, and the one I feel is most used by me when I’m teaching. Instead of viewing the learner as a passive processor of external stimuli, cognitivism asserts that learning can be more engaging and meaningful for students (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013). Piaget gives us a general guideline with his stages of development. Depending on the age level of our students, they are capable of different levels of complex thought (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013). Knowing what our students are capable of cognitively will help us make sure our curriculum and instruction is set up in such a way that our students will comprehend and retain our instruction.

Constructivism is the theory that suggests students can discover new concepts on their own by building on their existing knowledge (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013). Its valuable contributions include the idea of social learning and scaffolding. I love the idea of giving students the opportunity to teach and learn from each other. Sometimes, a student may relate better to an explanation given by a peer than to yours. I also think that it is so valuable to hear many different perspectives as we seek to find our own interpretation of the concepts we’re learning. Constructivists would suggest that despite the additional preparation and effort required to present a discovery lesson and have students determine the pace of the learning, it is well worth the effort. Students are asked to take more responsibility for their own learning and what they learned becomes more meaningful and memorable to them. Scaffolding is so valuable as an educator because often our students don’t master a concept after being taught only once. Scaffolding gives students a lot of support in the beginning to give them time to make connections and build their knowledge. As students get more comfortable, that support is gradually taken away. Often our students will be at Piaget’s Concrete Operational Stage (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013), meaning, our students will really struggle to conceptualize any abstract concepts and will certainly need scaffolding and concrete examples to help them understand. While I see the value in the constructivist components, I would find it unrealistic to try to teach students entirely through discovery learning. It takes a lot of time, and I feel most of our students (because of their young age) will still learn best from direct instruction.

B. The Lesson Plan (Lesson Plan from uen.org, cited below) GENERAL INFORMATION Lesson Title & Subject: Emperor or President? Topic or Unit of Study: History – Forms of Government Grade/Level: 6th Instructional Setting: Whole Group Instruction STANDARDS AND OBJECTIVES

Your State Core Curriculum/Student Achievement Standard:

Utah Core Social Studies 6.S1.3 – Explain how modern governments can trace some of their attributes to the systems of power, authority, and governance established in ancient civilizations. (UEN, 2008) Lesson Objective: Students will compare the modern government of the United States to the

various governmental experiments of Ancient Greece and Rome (UEN, 2009). They will provide at least three similarities and three differences. MATERIALS AND RESOURCES Instructional Materials: Texts, atlases, encyclopedias, and internet resources on ancient Greek and Roman governments (UEN, 2009) Resources: Utah Education Network. (2008). Retrieved November 06, 2020, from https://www.uen.org/core/core.do?courseNum=5130 Utah Education Network. (2009). Emperor or president? Retrieved November 11, 2020, from https://www.uen.org/lessonplan/view/23809 INSTRUCTIONAL PLAN 1. Student Prerequisite Skills/Connections to Previous Learning:

Students will need an understanding of the US government: representative democracy, legislative branches, system of checks and balances, etc. (UEN, 2009) 2. Presentation Procedures for New Information/Modeling (10 min.):

The teacher will guide the class in comparing and contrasting rules at home, in the school, and in the community, including who makes them and how they’re enforced. The goal of this discussion is to get students thinking about government and its purpose. Present a PowerPoint with information on the government experiments of Ancient Greece and Rome and the U.S. Government. With particular emphasis on how the Ancient Greek government influenced the formation and organization of our own. 3. Guided Practice (5 min):

The teacher will pass out materials (Venn diagram copy, reading information) and will have students take out two differentiated colored writing implements (one for similarities one for differences). As a class find the important information and take notes on the Venn diagram. Have students specifically give examples from the text.

4. Independent Student Practice (5 min):

Have students come up with one more similarity and one more difference on their own and discuss their ideas with the class. 5. Culminating or Closing Procedure (5 min): Introduce the topic for tomorrow’s lesson: Ancient Egyptian and Modern British Government Instructional Strategy:

Direct instruction, class discussion Differentiated Instruction Accommodations:

Teacher may help students with disabilities by helping them take notes, reading passages, and filling in diagrams. Accelerated learners can do a third category on their Venn diagram and include Ancient Rome. Use of Technology:

PowerPoint Presentation, online encyclopedias and articles Student Assessment/Rubrics:

Students will complete a Venn diagram on their own with an ancient government and modern government of their choice. The assessment will be done on a different day since not all of the content has been covered at this point.

C. Modification to the Lesson Instead of simply teaching this concept through direct instruction. A teacher might map out 3-4 days for this lesson and employ the constructivist jigsaw model (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013). I would have 6 groups and assign three of them to different ancient governments, and the other three to different modern governments. They would then teach each other to become experts on their form of government. They would then come to a new group where each person is an expert on a different government and proceed to teach each other. The Jigsaw Model is a constructivist idea since it utilizes the concept of social learning as well as discovery and research components. Students are responsible for learning and teaching themselves and each other. I believe this is an acceptable modification given the age of the students, and content of the lesson. Sixth-graders are able to remember more information and are better able to prioritize and select important information given proper guidance. They are also more social and might appreciate working with their peers more than listening their teacher lecture. Also, since there are

many topics and pieces of information to go through, breaking up the information into chunks and having the students learn and teach each other, I feel is a great way to organize the content. It also has the students more involved and engaged.

D. Level of Instructional Setting Using a higher grade-level as the target group for this lesson allowed me to include an involved constructivist component for the modification. I think third-graders could be capable of doing a jigsaw lesson, but it would require a ton of modeling, scaffolding, and practice. They would never be able to be as independent as sixth graders would be. Third graders are still very much in Piaget’s Concrete Operational Stage (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013), and would have a really hard time prioritizing what information they needed to learn and teach. Sixth graders are starting in the Formal Operational stage (Ryan, Cooper, & Tauer, 2013), and if given some simple guidelines could be much more success in finding and teaching the required information effectively. I would also be able to trust sixth-graders to work within their groups without too much interference from me, whereas third graders would need to be monitored much more closely to make sure the jigsaw process is being done correctly.

Sources Ryan, K., Cooper, J. M., & Tauer, S. (2013). Teaching for student learning: Becoming a master teacher. Belmont, CA: Cengage. Bruner, J. (2004). The process of education, rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press

Snowman, J., & McCown, R. R. (2015). Psychology applied to teaching. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning. Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational psychology, 11th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill....