Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Submitted by
Neeti Gupta
19931584
1
102086 Designing Teaching & Learning
Assignment 2: QT Analysis Template
Evaluate the lesson plan according to the following NSW Quality Teaching model elements.
1 Intellectual quality
1.1 Deep knowledge
5 Comments: Knowledge is deep because the focus is sustained on the range of
earth’s resources as renewable and non-renewable and strategies used by
people to manage non-renewable resources such as Plastic bags (high-density
polyethylene bags) throughout the lesson.
1.2 Deep understanding
5 Comments: Almost all students had been encouraged to demonstrate deep
understanding throughout the lesson. It is evident when students were asked to
fill out True or False questionnaire in the think-pair-share activity to review
students’ prior knowledge about the Plastic bags and then encouraged to
brainstorm ideas about the reason behind the production of plastic bags and
discussed it’s after-effects on the environment using cause and effect map
activity. At the end of the lesson, students were directed to create environment-
friendly or biodegradable bin liners as an alternative for Plastic bags.
1.3 Problematic knowledge
4 Comments: Knowledge is seen as socially constructed and multiple
perspectives are not only presented but are explored through questioning of their
basic assumptions about the plastic bags.
It is evident in the lesson when the teacher asked cause and effect map where
students learn what was historically seen as a positive characteristic of plastic
bags are now understood as negative because of their environmental effect.
1.4 Higher-order thinking
4 Comments: Most students demonstrate higher-order thinking in one major
activity (create /Improvise biodegradable bag) that occupies a substantial
portion of the lesson.
It is evident in the lesson where students were allowed to create/ improvise their
biodegradable bag (from newspapers) and all the students were seen actively
participating in the given activity.
1.5 Metalanguage
2 Comments: Low metalanguage. There is no clarification or assistance provided
regarding the language used in the lesson. Throughout the lesson, scientific
terminology such as Renewable, Non-renewable and Biodegradable had been
used, but they were not defined anywhere in the lesson. To improve this, the
teacher could add crossword puzzles sheet in the activity.
1.6 Substantive communication
2
5 Comments: Substantive communication, with sustained interactions about the
non-renewable source such as Plastic bag, occurs throughout the lesson, with
teacher scaffolding the communication using various activities such as think-
pair-share activity, cause and effect map. Teacher discussed the response with
students after each activity. Teacher communicates a thought or idea beyond the
simple IRE (initiate–respond–evaluate) pattern using logical extension or
synthesis where the flow of communication carries a line of reasoning.
Quality learning environment
2.1 Explicit quality criteria
4 Comments: While beginning the lesson, the teacher demonstrated the high-
quality work criteria on the whiteboard, which learners consistently used to
assess their practical work.
It is evidenced when the students had been encouraged to discuss the pros. and
cons. (PCQ activity) of the environment-friendly bin liner shown by the teacher.
Students were then allowed to improvise the bin liner. Teacher provided
feedback during development and as well on completion of the task.
2.2 Engagement
5 Comments: Serious engagement. All students are deeply involved, almost all of
the time, in pursuing the substance of the lesson.
All the students were seen actively participated in all the activities such as
Think-pair-share designed by the teacher. Students had been given control over
the improvised design of the bin liner to make it better. One group of students
was asked to name their bin liners. This further promoted student ownership and
interest.
2.3 High expectations
4 Comments: Most students participate in challenging work during most of the
lesson. They are encouraged (explicitly or through lesson processes) to try hard
and to take risks and are recognised for doing so. It is evidenced when the
teacher gave liberty to design the improvised version (challenging work) of the
environment-friendly bin liner. Teacher encouraged students to brainstorm
ideas to improvise the biodegradable bin liner.
2.4 Social support
5 Comments: Social support is strong. Supportive behaviours or comments from
students and the teacher are directed at all students, including soliciting and
valuing the contributions of all.
It is evidenced when the teacher allowed all students to contribute and
collaborate in a think-pair-share activity. The teacher celebrated students’
accomplishment by providing positive feedback when they finished their
challenging task of redesigning the bin liner.
2.5 Students’ self-regulation
5 Comments: All students, almost all the time, demonstrate autonomy and
initiative in regulating their own behaviour and the lesson proceeds without
interruption.
There is no evidence of interruption during the lesson observed. All the student
were seen actively listening and participating throughout the lesson.
2.6 Student direction
3 Comments: Student direction is moderate. Although students exercise some
control over some aspect of the lesson, their control is minimal or trivial. Most
3
of the activities were teacher-directed Student did not have any choice. To
improve, the teacher could include ICT and provide choice of biodegradable
materials to redesign their eco-friendly bin liner rather than using newspapers
only.
3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
5 Comments: Students’ background knowledge about the non-renewable source
such as plastic bag is consistently incorporated into the lesson, and there is a
substantial connection to out-of-school background knowledge. It is evidenced
in think-pair-share activity (mini-diagnostic test) where students’ background
knowledge about the Plastic bags have been identified.
3.2 Cultural knowledge
3 Comments: Some cultural knowledge is recognised and valued in the lesson
“bin liners", but within the framework of the dominant Australian culture. It is
evident in a think-pair-share activity questionnaire where all the questions
related to the country Australia. To improve this, the educator could replace
some of the questions related to the perspective of Plastic bags in different
cultures.
3.3 Knowledge integration
4 Comments: High knowledge integration is identifiable as meaningful
connections are made among science, mathematics and geography
(environment science) subjects. For instance, when students were encouraged
to identify cause and effect map (environmental effect) related to plastic bags.
They were further encouraged later in the lesson to identify ways (Maths
strategy) to improve the eco-friendly bin liners using the MAS (Modify. Add,
Size) sheet.
3.4 Inclusivity
4 Comments: High inclusivity is evident as there were no negative forms of
prejudice and discrimination, and thus all students, regardless of their social
grouping, encouraged to participate fully in the lesson. The teacher was
circulating in the classroom and assist student work. Students were encouraged
to involve in group work (for example such as improvised eco- friendly bin
liners) and discussion (for instance think-pair-share activity) to encourage peer
interaction and engagement. The teacher encouraged peer support during
demonstrations of improvised bin liners.
3.5 Connectedness
5 Comments: Students recognise and explore connections between classroom
knowledge of renewable and non- renewable resources and how non-renewable
resources such as Plastic bags creating a problem for the environment and living
creatures. In the lesson, students had been educated on what steps the
Government has taken to solve the problem caused by plastic bags and what is
individual or student responsibility as a citizen. This creates personal meaning
and highlights the significance of the knowledge. This meaning and significance
are strong enough to lead students to become involved in solving the problem
by fostering the use of biodegradable bin liner resource.
3.6 Narrative
4
1 Comments: The narrative is low as there is no evidence of storytelling or case
studies in the lesson “bin liners”. To improve this teacher can narrate a small
story related to non-renewable resource –Plastic bags.
QT model
1) Metalanguage (1.5) 2) cultural knowledge (3.2)
3 ) Student direction (2.6) 4) Narrative ( 3.6)
5
Modified Lesson Plan
The amendments have been highlighted in yellow.
Note: Not all activities may be captured by the video. Assume they were covered by the teacher.
6
Give overview of thinking tools to be used:
Think-pair-share and one cross-word sheet on metalanguage with hints
Cause-effect map
Pros-Cons-Questions
7
How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?
Academic Justification
Teacher required to be proficient in designing the curriculum and planning effective lesson to support
educational equity and excellence (NESA, 2014). To support educators in achieving these goals,
Ladwig and Gore (2009) developed the NSW model of pedagogy with three dimensions consisting
of total 18 elements and coding scales. Using the Quality Teaching Analysis template of this model,
the given lesson plan of bin liners was analysed, coded and modified. This essay will justify the
amendments made in the four elements –metalanguage, cultural knowledge, and student direction
and narrative. These elements required some improvement in the lesson in order to maximise the
In the “bin liners” lesson, low metalanguage (element 1.5) is identified (Ladwig & Gore, 2006), as
there is no explanation or support provided regarding the scientific language or jargon used related
with the topic- range of earth’s resources and management. Throughout the lesson, scientific
terminology such as Renewable, Non-renewable and Biodegradable, had been used but they were not
metalanguage learners can accomplish challenging tasks in the school curriculum and have a better
compartmentalize the mechanics of language and how it works so that they can learn it more easily.
Students expect such metalanguage to be used when discussing the topic” (Basturkmen, Loewen, &
Ellis, 2002, p.2). To improve this, the teacher could provide crossword sheets as a crosswords results
8
in metacognitive and automotive learning process which learners require along with “cueing system”
With references to the classroom practice guide (Ladwig & Gore, 2006), Student direction (element
2.6) found fairly on the lower side as compared to other high elements. Although learners had some
control over some features of the lesson, their control is minimal. Most of the activities were teacher-
directed. Students had not been given any choice except redesigning the eco-friendly bin liner which
teacher had shown. According to Wright, Bergom, & Brooks (2011), in the student-centred
learning environment learners have been allowed to lead in a learning space. This does not
only promote engagements and growth, but also empowers learners to take ownership of the
learning environment. In order to reinforce a student- direction approach in the given lesson,
the teacher could have used information communication technology (ICT) device as it helps
in developing “skill of collaboration, problem solving and creativity among student” Schulz-
Zander, Büchter, & Dalmer, 2002). Further, to promote student-direction the teacher could
and encouraged students to design their innovative bin liners using these materials rather than
newspaper only.
Some cultural knowledge (element 3.2) (Ladwig & Gore, 2006, p.42) is “recognised and valued in
the lesson “bin liners", but within the framework of the dominant Australian culture”. It is evident
in a think-pair-share activity questionnaire where all the questions were related to the country-
Australia only. According to Gay (2002, p.1), “implementing cultural knowledge not only express
interest in the ethnic background of the students but redirect the role of the teacher in
the classroom from instructor to facilitator”. This element provides “opportunity for learners to look
beyond stereotypes used to describe different social groups” (Griner & Stewart, 2013, p.1). To
9
strengthen this element the teacher could have asked a few questions related to different
With reference to classroom practice guide (Ladwig & Gore, 2006), the narrative is found very low
(element 3.6) in the given lesson as there is no evidence of storytelling or case studies about the topic
discussed. According to Chan (2012), the use of the narrative in the teaching promotes students’
thinking, self-reflection and transform into active learners. He further stated, “The narrative in the
lesson can provide an answer that addresses both immediate lesson activity needs as well as the
overall importance of the subject. The structure of a classroom narrative will vary depending on the
needs of the teacher.” A narrative can support those students who are less capable in using abstract
constructs to exhibit their understanding. The narrative offers a motivation for an engagement, but
also seeks to answer the bigger question of learner: Why do I need to study “topic of the lesson”? In
order to include narrative, the teacher can narrate a small story related to non-renewable resource–
Plastic bags or could ask students to share stories after completion of their task.
In conclusion, it is recommended that all the elements mentioned in the NSW model are included in
a lesson to make teaching and learning productive (Ladwig & Gore, 2009). However, the given lesson
plan is low culturally responsive and has limited narrative, metalanguage and student direction. The
teacher can strengthen the overall quality of the lesson through suggested modification without
10
References:
Basturkmen, H., Loewen, S., & Ellis, R. (2002). Metalanguage in Focus on Form in the
Communicative Classroom. Language Awareness, 11(1), 1-13. doi:10.1080/09658410208667042
Coffey, S. (1998). Linguistic aspects of the cryptic crossword. English Today, 14(1), 14-18.
doi:10.1017/S0266078400000663
Griner, A. C., & Stewart, M. L. (2013). Addressing the Achievement Gap and Disproportionality
Through the Use of Culturally Responsive Teaching Practices. Urban Education, 48(4), 585–
621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912456847
Ladwig. J., & Gore. J. (2009). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: a classroom practice
guide. Sydney, NSW: Dept. of Education and Training, Professional Learning and Leadership
Development Directorate. Retrieved from https://app.education.nsw.gov.au/quality-teaching-
rounds/Assets/Classroom_Practice_Guide_ogogVUqQeB.pdf
Schulz-Zander, R., Büchter, A., & Dalmer, R. (2002). The role of ICT as a promoter of students'
cooperation. 18(4), 438-448. doi:10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.002.x
Wright, M., Bergom, C., & Brooks, I. (2011). The Role of Teaching Assistants in Student -
Centered Learning: Benefits, Costs, and Negotiations. Innovative Higher Education, 36(5),
331-342.
e-portfolio link
https://neetigupta30.weebly.com/planning.html
11