Page

Foundations and Methods of the English Language Learner

Literacy Development and Content Instruction
SIOP Lesson Plan on Lord of the Flies
Lesson 2

Lesson 2: Lord of the Flies

Common Core Standards:
RI1: Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says
explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.
W10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflections, and
revisions) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks,
purposes, and audiences.
SL1. Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one,
in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grade 9-10 topics, texts, and issues,
building on others ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.
SL4. Present information, findings, and supporting evidence clearly, concisely, and logically
such that listeners can follow the line of reasoning and the organization, development,
substance, and style are appropriate to purpose, audience, and task.
L.4 Determine or clarify the meaning of unknown and multiple-meaning words and phrases
based on grades 9-10 reading and content, choosing flexibility from a range of strategies.
ELD Standards:
1. Collaborative: Exchanging information and ideas with others through oral collaborative
discussions on a range of social and academic topics
6. Collaborative: Reading closely literary and informational texts and viewing multimedia to
determine how meaning is conveyed explicitly and implicitly through language
5. Interpretive: Listening actively to spoken English in a range of social and academic
contexts
6. Interpretive: Reading closely literary and informational texts and viewing multimedia to
determine how meaning is conveyed explicitly and implicitly through language
7. Interpretive: Evaluating how well writers use language to support ideas and arguments
with details or evidence depending on modality, text type, purpose, audience, topic, and
content area
8. Interpretive: Analyzing how writers use vocabulary and other language resources for
specific purposes (to explain, persuade, entertain, etc.) depending on modality, text type,
purpose, audience, topic, and content area
9. Productive: Expressing information and ideas in formal oral presentations on academic
topics
Theme (Enduring Understanding):
Humanity

1 of 9

Page

Lesson Topic:
Nature vs Nurture
Objectives: Students will be able to
Language:

Write what they know about the lesson topic, what they want to know and what they
learned
Write an opinion about nature versus nurture, using examples based on experience
Write down the differences between nature and nurture
Read the assigned informational text independently, highlighting key information
Speak with a group about a common goal
Identify, read and write vocabulary words from the informational text and the literature

Content:

Successfully complete a KWL chart for this lesson

Using supporting evidence, journal an opinion of nature versus nurture
Identify examples of nature versus nurture in the text and provide specific text
evidence to support reasoning
Analyze and annotate the assigned informational text independently
Communicate successfully with a group to complete a goal
Identify, define and utilize vocabulary words in complete sentences in the appropriate
context

Learning Strategies:
Pre-teach vocabulary terms
Listen actively
Read with understanding
Utilize prior knowledge
Visual aids
Pause. Ask questions. Pause. Review.
Key Vocabulary:
Verbal reference: predisposed, genetics, environmental factors, nature, nurture
Literature Book: flourish, over-mastering, indignantly, scar, fulcrum, matins, precentor,
pallor, immured, loitered
Article: potent, waived, prosecuted, and infested
Materials:
Teacher Materials:
Conch
Annotated, teacher version of LOTF
Smart Board
Blank Venn Diagram to display
NY Times article, Prison for Young Killers Renews Debate on Saving Societys Lost
(__# of copies)
Extra highlighters

2 of 9

Page

3 of 9

Student Materials:
LOTF book
Writing Journals and Word Journals
Notebook paper and pens/pencils/highlighters
Graphic Organizers:
KWL Chart
Venn Diagram
Motivation:
Teacher: When a person achieves academic success, did they do so because they are
genetically predisposed to be successful or is it a result of their environment? If a man
abuses his wife and kids, is it because he was born with violent tendencies or is it something
he learned by observing his parents behavior?
Predisposed: make someone liable or inclined to a specified attitude, action, or condition
1. Teacher: Ask class to define predisposed.
2. Then, define this vocab word with the class. Review at end of day/Quiz at end of unit.
3. Students are to take out their word journals and write this word/definition, then use it
in a complete sentence (they are familiar with the process).
Journal Entry (written on the board and read aloud/identify any unknown vocabulary terms):
Do you believe genetics or environmental factors play a greater role in influencing
[your] behavior? Why? Provide examples.
Presentation
1. Pass out the KWL charts.
2. Ask the class: What do you know about Nature and Nurture? (EVALUATING)
3. First, students are to quietly write a few notes down on the KWL chart about what
they KNOW about Nature and Nurture (they are familiar with the process).
4. Next, the teacher reveals the definitions for Nature and Nurture on the overhead
projector.
5. Students are to take out their word journals and copy these words/definitions, then
use them in a complete sentence (they are familiar with the process).
6. As a class, discuss examples of nature and nurture; teacher lists on the overhead.
7. Write down stress. Ask: Is it nature or nurture? Can it be both? Write Stress in the
middle of the Venn Diagram. Continue with this discussion until you are confident all
students understand the differences. Fill out the Venn Diagram as you go along.
8. What do you want to know about Nature and Nurture? Have students briefly write a
few notes on their KWL chart.

Page

4 of 9

Practice/Application
Prompt: At what age should a criminal go to prison? Is12 too young?
Read: Prison for Young Killers Renews Debate on Saving Societys
Lost:
1. Teacher passes out and then reads the article aloud, Prison for Young Killers
Renews Debate on Saving Societys Lost. Feel free to ask for volunteers.
2. Then, teacher addresses the highlighted words (students know to write these new
terms in their word journals). Define and discuss in context as you go.
3. Next, have each student work independently to re-read the article and annotate it
(students have had prior experience annotating and know what is expected).
4. While students are quietly reading, the teacher has the opportunity to move around
the room, assisting lower-level readers with the assignment. The teacher should take
notes and assess students during this time. If any student is observed struggling over
the assignment, it will be noted and addressed in a 1:1.
Debate: Prison for Young Killers Renews Debate on Saving Societys
Lost:
1. Write this question on the board:
If found guilty, should a 12 year old be locked up in maximum security juvenile
prison?
2. Have students raise their hands for yes. Those students must gather on one side of
the room. The no answers on the other side of the room. You will now have one
Yes group and one No group.
3. Let the students know they are grades on their participation within groups and as an
active speaker.
4. Write the names of all students according to their group. Mark the names of those
students actively participating.
5. Allow the groups approximately 15-30 minutes to build an argument. They may use a
Chrome book. Be available to assist and to grade their participation.
6. Review the rules (shown on Smart Board). In short, only the person with the conch
may speak. Speaker has one minute of the floor, then other side has a chance to hold
a one minute rebuttal and so it will go. Every person has an opportunity to speak.
7. Stop the debate 5-10 minutes before the bell for Review and Assessment. This
assignment may be continued into the next class.
Differentiation:
Guided Reading
Collaborative Group Learning
KWL Chart
Review and Assessment (two types):
1. Take out your KWL chart and fill out the last column. What did you learn today?
2. Give students a few minutes to complete the chart.
3. Ask the class: Give me one vocabulary term from today. What is its definition?
(EVALUATE)

Page

4. Review all vocabulary words from todays lesson as a class.

Collect KWL charts to assess/grade.

Collect all journals for review/feedback.

Sources:
Nature Vs Nurture for Lord of the Flies by Patricia Pivaronas pd.5

https://prezi.com/_mcm92ykqa_b/nature-vs-nurture-for-lord-of-the-flies-by-patriciapivaronas-pd-5/
Accessed 1/27/16
NY Times Article: Prison for Young Killers Renews Debate on Saving Societys Lost

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/31/us/prison-for-young-killers-renews-debate-onsaving-society-s-lost.html
Accessed: 1/27/16

Smelser, Tricia (2016) Lesson Two: Lord of the Flies Unpublished lesson plan,
University of California, San Diego.

5 of 9

Page

6 of 9

Prison for Young Killers Renews

Debate on Saving Society's Lost
By DON TERRY
Published: January 31, 1996

CHICAGO, Jan. 30 The little one is 12 years old, stands less than 5 feet tall and will be the
youngest child locked up in a maximum-security juvenile prison in the country.
When he was 10, he dropped 5-year-old Eric Morse out of a 14th-floor window of a mean Chicago
public housing development for refusing to steal candy for him. His I.Q. hovers below 60.
The older one, his partner in the murder, is also headed for prison, at age 13. He failed every
subject in the fourth grade, including gym, but was passed into the fifth grade and was repeating it
when he was arrested at 11. His father, who taught him how to fight when he was 6 or 7, is in prison
for home invasion. The boy frequently ran away from home and slept in abandoned buildings. His
I.Q. is 76.

Page

7 of 9

The boys, whose names have not been made public because of their ages, must be freed by the time
they turn 21.
Ignored, neglected and failed for most of their lives by parents, teachers and social workers, the two
are now at the center of a national debate about how to handle the youngest of the bad. Together
they have become the potent symbols of fear of a future overrun by cold-hearted child criminals.
At its core, the debate boils down to a question of how society can protect itself from its own lost
children. Should they be locked up as if they were tiny adults, or should they be sent to secure
residential treatment centers where they can get intensive counseling?
In state after state, including Illinois, the answer has been harsher punishment as laws have been
changed to lower the age when a child or teen-ager can be sent to a juvenile prison or waived into
the much harsher world of adult courts.
Jay Hoffman, a Democratic state legislator who helped push through a package of tougher Illinois
juvenile justice laws in 1994, shortly after the two boys were arrested, said in an interview that such
youngsters were more like "predators" and "hardened criminals" than children.
Before Eric Morse was killed, children under 13 in Illinois could not be sent to a juvenile prison.
Afterwards, the law was quickly changed to make children as young as 10 eligible to be locked up.
Juvenile prisons are similar to adult ones, but they hold far fewer inmates and provide for
mandatory schooling.
"I think all of us agree that hardened criminals should be punished," Mr. Hoffman said. "If you do
an adult crime, you should be treated like an adult criminal. That's my sense of what the public very
much wants."
Dr. Bruce Perry, a psychiatrist at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston who studies violence in
children, agreed that juvenile criminals should be punished. But at the same time, he said, they
must receive intensive psychiatric care and old-fashioned nurturing that most have never found in
their homes.
Dr. Perry said the best place for such deeply troubled and violent children is in a well-secured
residential treatment center, where there are fewer inmates, where more intensive rehabilitation
therapy is available and where the staff generally is trained in counseling.
"There are places that have shown good success rates," he said. "It's not easy, and it's expensive.
And because of that, much of the public considers such placements a waste of time and emotion.

Page

8 of 9

But do you want a child who was capable of terrible violence at a young age to be put into a cell,
receive little or no intervention, and then simply be sent home five years later? I know I don't want
to meet that child then."
The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services said it could not find an appropriate
residential center to take the boys, whom a spokeswoman described as "very disruptive" and
involved in several fights while in a detention center since their arrest. The boy's lawyers said they
found an out-of-state program willing to take them.
"He's not a monster," said David Hirschboeck, a public defender representing the 12-year-old. "I
suppose some people will say he is. But one thing is certain now, we are barreling down the road to
making him one."
Jack O'Malley, the Cook County State's Attorney, whose office prosecuted the boys, said he was
confident the boys would receive adequate counseling at either a juvenile prison or a residential
center. "But what particularly concerns me is that these kids are going to get out," he said. "They're
going to be very young men at that time. There is a tremendous responsibility to go to whatever
lengths necessary to rehabilitate them. These two kids are as risky as they get."
In sentencing the boys to prison on Monday, the judge in the case, Carol Kelly of Cook County
Juvenile Court, tried to balance treatment and punishment but tipped the scales toward
punishment because, "these two held a 5-year-old out a window and then dropped him to a
terrifying death."
Corrections officials assured the court that the necessary psychiatric services were available for the
boys in juvenile prison. Still, Judge Kelly was taking no chances.
As part of the sentence, she said, the department must provide her within the next two months with
a detailed treatment plan and full psychiatric evaluation of the boys. Eventually, she said, if they do
well, they could be transferred to a residential treatment center.
But Michael Mahoney, executive director of the John Howard Association, which monitors the
Cook County justice system, said he was worried that the boys would not receive the kind of
treatment they need because the programs at juvenile prisons are limited, if they exist at all.
Both boys have been preyed on for most of their lives. They grew up in one of the city's roughest
housing development, Ida B. Wells, where gangs, guns and death at an early age are part of
everyday life.

Page

9 of 9

Michelle Kaplan, the lawyer for the 13-year-old, said her client would probably end up in a
medium-security prison with 263 inmates and one psychiatrist who only works a few hours a week.
"You cannot compare that with what he could get at a residential treatment facility," she said.
Ms. Kaplan said the boy had been ignored and failed by almost every adult in his life. He was
passed through school even though he could barely read or write. He was picked up by the police
several times for theft and disorderly conduct but never saw a social worker. His neighborhood was
infested with violence.
"There's this history leading up to this child being in crisis, and no one has ever intervened," Ms.
Kaplan said. "Now the system has finally intervened, and they want to throw him away. They're
children. They're not animals."

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/31/us/prison-for-young-killers-renews-debate-onsaving-society-s-lost.html