102086 Designing Teaching & Learning

Assignment 2
Lesson Plan Analysis

Table of Contents
Original Lesson Plan.............................................................................. 2
Lesson Plan Analysis............................................................................. 4
Modified Lesson Plan ............................................................................ 8
Academic Justification ......................................................................... 11
References .......................................................................................... 14
Learning Portfolio Web Link ................................................................. 16

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 1

Original Lesson Plan

Topic area: Timetables Stage of Learner: stage 6, Syllabus Pages: pp. 34

11, Standard
Date: 03/05/18 Location Booked: Classroom Lesson number: 8
Time: 50 minutes Total Number of students: Printing/preparation:
30 Links to various transport
websites ready. Print
worksheets and
corresponding timetables.
Need access to a Smart
Board.

Outcomes Assessment Students learn Students learn to

about
Formative The interpretation of Students review how to
assessment different timetables interpret timetables and
takes place and how this can be use this to solve
MS11-3, MS11-4, throughout the used as a part of life. problems using a range
MS11-9, MS11-10. lesson. Teacher How public of different timetables,
walks around transportation can be including ferries, buses
and asks used as a means of and trains. Incorporate
questions, and promoting 12-hour and 24-hour
ensures that sustainability. time into understanding
students are timetables.
staying on task.

Time Teaching and learning actions

Intro Teacher greets students and asks them to sit down in their seats. Students
5 mins take out their workbook and stationery required for the lesson. Teacher
outlines what the lesson will entail.

Revision Revision
5 mins
Teacher hands back results from the in-class assessment from lesson 7.
Teacher outlines what was done well overall and what the class will work on
together, to improve students’ understanding of content, as a path to
achieve syllabus outcomes.
Body Class discussion
10 mins
Teacher facilitates discussion between students and asks questions about
when and where you may need to use a transportation timetable. Teacher
shows a transport timetable on the Smartboard and asks:
1. What is the purpose of this timetable?
2. What features does this timetable have?
3. What would happen if this timetable did not exist?
Within this section, the teacher briefly discusses with students about how
using public transport can help with sustainability, by reducing carbon
emissions and what the impact human activity has on ecosystems. Teacher

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 2

 asks students what sustainability means to them.
10 mins Class activity and Smartboard interaction

Students get into pairs and ask each other travel related questions, based
on the ferry timetable that appears on the Smartboard. For example, “What
time do I have to leave Old Cremorne Wharf, if I am to arrive at Circular
Quay, Wharf 2 by 2pm?” Teacher walks around the room and checks
students are staying on task, asking relevant questions and helping where
necessary. Teacher ensures that students are helping each other, as a form
of social support.
15 mins Worksheet activity*

Teacher hands out train timetable worksheet activity. Students have the
option of working on this alone, or with another person.
Conclusion Teacher summarises the key points of the lesson. Discusses what the next
5 mins lesson will entail. Asks students if they have any further questions.

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

MS11-3 Teacher and student questioning throughout
lesson, timetable worksheet.
MS11-4 Students working in pairs and helping each other
perform calculations based on time.
MA11-10 Timetable worksheet.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 3

Lesson Plan Analysis

Section 1: Evaluation of Lesson Plan based on Australian Professional

Standards for Teachers
Evaluation score – 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)

1 Know students and how they learn

1.3 Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic
backgrounds
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Teacher provides help where necessary and endorses
4–5 collaborative learning to encourage social support.
1.4 Strategies for teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Not mentioned at all in the lesson plan; however, it could
4–5 be embedded in the discussion section or incorporated in the activities.
1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the
full range of abilities
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Working in pair for class activity help to meet the needs of
4–5 students with learning difficulties, however the class activity does not
fully accommodate students who are gifted and talented. Providing
option of working alone or in pair when completing worksheet also
incorporates differentiated instruction.
1.6 Strategies to support full participation of students with disability
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Not mentioned at all even though this topic is highly
4–5 relevant for all students including students with disabilities.
2 Know the content and how to teach it
2.2 Content selection and organisation
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The content is relevant to the unit area and can be related
4–5 to real life situations, however does not provide evidence of prior
knowledge.
2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Lesson is well structured with regard to curriculum and
4–5 informal diagnostic assessment is carried out throughout the lesson
through questioning and observation. Teacher provides results from
previous assessment and gives feedback for improvement.
2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: This lesson is designed in traditional way (pen and paper
4–5 based activities). The only ICT integration was the use of smart broad,
which was only utilised as a tool for demonstration and not being used
to its full potential such as designing interactive activities.
3 Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
3.1 Establish challenging learning goals
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Achievable learning goals are provided for a range of
4–5 students. However, there is no evidence of incorporation of 12-hour
and 24-hour time into understanding timetables, which was one of the
learning goals.
3.2 Plan, structure and sequence learning programs
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The structure of lesson is well organised and sequential as
4–5 it scaffolds learning of new information appropriately. However, it is not
evident that the lesson builds on prior knowledge.
3.3 Use teaching strategies

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 4

1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The lesson is mostly teacher driven but it also
4–5 demonstrates involvement of students in the form of pair work and
discussion among students. It integrates critical thinking and
collaborative learning.
3.4 Select and use resources
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Most of the lesson is based on pen and paper but there is
4–5 also ICT integration in the lesson plan with the use of smart board.
4 Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
4.1 Support student participation
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Paired learning and discussions encourages participation
4–5 and can increase engagement in class. Collaborative learning can
promote positive learning environment.
4.2 Manage classroom activities
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Lesson has a good flow and includes clearly detailed
4–5 classroom activities.
4.3 Manage challenging behaviour
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: There is no mention of strategies addressing challenging
4–5 behaviours in the lesson plan. Expectations of behaviour from students
are not set out.
4.4 Maintain student safety
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Maintaining positive and respectful environment during
4–5 pair activity and discussion in the class as teacher monitors to ensure
students are helping each other.
4.5 Use ICT safely, responsibly and ethically
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Responsible and safe use of ICT has not been explicitly
4–5 mentioned in the lesson plan. However, teacher could have already
discussed this with students.
5 Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
5.1 Assess student learning
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Formative assessment is carried out throughout the lesson
4–5 and at the end students are encouraged to ask questions if they need
further explanation.
5.2 Provide feedback to students on their learning
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: General feedback provided in the form of discussion of
4–5 answers but not specific to individual student’s learning.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 5

Section 2: NSW Quality Teaching Model Analysis of Lesson Plan

Evaluation score – referred to NSW QTM Classroom Practice Guide for each
element

1 Intellectual quality
1.1 Deep knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Most of the content knowledge of the lesson is deep and
4–5 there was sustained focus on timetables but some of the content
regarding relationship between timetable and sustainability is
addressed at a superficial level.
1.2 Deep understanding
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Lesson is mostly led by teacher; however, discussions
4–5 among students and answering questions can demonstrate
understanding of central concept at different points in the lesson.
1.3 Problematic knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Pair activity and discussions can allow multiple
4–5 perspectives as students can express their opinion and ask questions.
However, there is no evidence of analysis and judgement about
appropriateness of students’ interpretation in the given context.
1.4 Higher-order thinking
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Potentially some high-order thinking during class
4–5 discussion and worksheet activity, which occupies a substantial portion
of the lesson. The lesson appears to be scaffolded to achieve set
outcomes.
1.5 Metalanguage
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: There was very minimal use of metalanguage, such as
4–5 timetable and sustainability, at the beginning of the lesson. There is,
however, no evidence of clarification provided by the teacher regarding
the language.
1.6 Substantive communication
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The lesson allows for ongoing communication and
4–5 sustained interactions occurs for most part of the lesson. It could be
made more beneficial by including more guidance for students who
complete their tasks early.
Quality learning environment
2.1 Explicit quality criteria
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The lesson plan does not explicitly outline the expected
4–5 quality of work and there is no evidence that students are using criteria
to examine the quality of their work. But, it could be implied from
teacher’s observation of students being on task.
2.2 Engagement
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Lesson seems to be engaging for most students, most of
4–5 the time but it does not fully cater for students who are gifted and
talented and students who already have prior knowledge and
understood the concepts. So, there is a possibility of disengagement
for these students.
2.3 High expectations
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Lesson is designed to allow participation from most
4–5 students in challenging work and they are encouraged to try through

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 6

 lesson processes. However, the expectations are not explicitly set out
and there is no risk or recognition for taking risks.
2.4 Social support
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Pair work and class discussion can promote positive social
4–5 support if done in respectful manner. However, supportive behaviours
such as soliciting and inclusion of reluctant students are not
mentioned.
2.5 Students’ self-regulation
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Strategies to address challenging behaviours are not
4–5 outlined in the lesson plan, which might imply that most students
demonstrate autonomy and make initiative to regulate their own
behaviour most of the time.
2.6 Student direction
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Activities are set out by the teacher and allows minimal
4–5 student direction. Although teacher gave them choice of working alone
or in pair for worksheet activity, their control is trivial.
3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Students’ prior knowledge is not assessed in the lesson
4–5 and the revision at the beginning of the lesson does not seem to be
relevant to this lesson. However, there are few questions during
discussion that examines background knowledge about the content.
3.2 Cultural knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: There is no reference made to cultural knowledge or social
4–5 groups. There is probably minimal scope for that in the given context.
3.3 Knowledge integration
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: One of the cross-curriculum priorities, sustainability, is
4–5 integrated in the lesson and was linked with the topic in a meaningful
way.
3.4 Inclusivity
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: Inclusivity is not mentioned in the lesson plan so there
4–5 might be potential risks of some students being disengaged.
3.5 Connectedness
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: The activities attempts to link the content being learning
4–5 with the outside world. This lesson is highly relevant to students’ lives.
3.6 Narrative
1 – 2 – 3 – Comments: There was no use of any narrative techniques such as
4–5 case studies or personal stories as part of discussion in the lesson.

Section 3: Identifying Areas for Improvement in APST standards and NSW QT

Model elements

APST
1) 1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the 2) 2.6 Information and Communication
specific learning needs of students Technology (ICT)
across the full range of abilities
NSW QT Model
1) 1.4 Higher-order thinking 2) 2.1 Explicit quality criteria

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 7

Modified Lesson Plan
Topic area: Timetables Stage of Learner: stage 6, 11, Syllabus Pages: pp.34
Standard
Date: 03/05/18 Location Booked: Classroom Lesson Number: 8

Time: 50 minutes Total Number of students: 30 Printing/preparation:

Links to various transport
websites ready. Print
worksheets and
corresponding timetables.
Need access to a Smart
Board.

Outcomes Assessment Students learn Students learn to

about
MS 11-3 Formative The interpretation of Students review how
Solves problems involving assessment different timetables to interpret timetables
quantity measurements, takes place and how this can be and use this to solve
including accuracy and the throughout the used as a part of problems using a
choice of relevant units lesson. life. How public range of different
(NESA, 2012). Teacher walks transportation can timetables, including
around and be used as a means ferries, buses and
MA11-9 asks questions, of promoting trains. Incorporate
Uses appropriate and ensures sustainability. 12-hour and 24-hour
technology to investigate, that students time into
organise and interpret are staying on understanding
information in a range of task. Class timetables.
contexts (NESA, 2012). discussion and
student self-
MA11-10 evaluation to
Justifies a response to a gather
given problem using evidence about
appropriate mathematical how students
terminology and/or learn and what
calculations (NESA, 2012). they know.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 8

Time Teaching and learning actions
Intro Teacher greets students and asks them to sit down in their seats. Students
5 mins take out their workbook and stationery required for the lesson. Teacher
outlines what the lesson will entail.

Revision Revision
5 mins
Teacher hands back results from the in-class assessment from lesson 7.
Teacher outlines what was done well overall and what the class will work on
together, to improve students’ understanding of content, as a path to
achieve syllabus outcomes. Teacher provides feedback that helps students
reflect on their progress and understand how to improve their learning by
setting learning goals (NESA, 2012). Teacher gathers information on the
prior knowledge of students through oral questioning:
-What does timetable look like?
-Where can we see timetables?
-Have they used it for any purposes? (For eg: exam timetables, class
timetables, TV guide)
Body Class discussion
10 mins
Teacher facilitates discussion between students and asks questions about
when and where you may need to use a transportation timetable. Teacher
shows a transport timetable on the Smartboard and asks:
1. What is the purpose of this timetable?
2. What features does this timetable have?
3. What would happen if this timetable did not exist?
Within this section, the teacher briefly discusses with students about how
using public transport can help with sustainability, by reducing carbon
emissions and what the impact human activity has on ecosystems. Teacher
asks students what sustainability means to them. Teacher encourages
critical thinking and scaffolds learning by creating scenarios and open-ended
modelling-style problems.
Video demonstration: Students will watch a short instructional video
demonstrating how to use TripView. They are then asked to use their smart
devices to access TripView and search for routes of their local bus/train and
look-up alternative routes for travel. This allows for differentiated learning
and teaching life-skill.
YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DipX_LfmVo

10 mins Class activity and Smartboard interaction

Students get into pairs and ask each other travel related questions, based
on the ferry timetable that appears on the Smartboard. For example, “What
time do I have to leave Old Cremorne Wharf, if I am to arrive at Circular
Quay, Wharf 2 by 2pm?” Teacher walks around the room and checks
students are staying on task, asking relevant questions and helping where
necessary. Teacher ensures that students are helping each other, as a form
of social support.
Rubric to be used during observation:
 Students interpret timetable accurately
 Students choose and use appropriate calculations
 Students use mathematical reasoning to evaluate conclusions and

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 9

 communicating a position clearly to others
 Students apply critical thinking when timetables get complicated such
as delays or cancellation (NESA, 2012).
15 mins Worksheet activity*

Teacher hands out train timetable worksheet activity. Students are divided
into groups of four based on their knowledge of the topic, however they have
the option of working on this alone with teacher’s approval to cater for
students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).
Lesson is scaffolded for students with higher-abilities by designing extra
activities for students who complete the task before time limit. They are
asked to play spinning wheel game on the smart board to pick one of the
transportation modes (plane, bus, ferry, train or tram) and use internet to
look up information on its timetable in different cities. This is assessed by
follow-up questions such as:
- What sort of differences there are in the ways timetables are presented in
different cities?
- What differences or similarities there are in plane, train, bus and ferry’s
timetables?
Resource: To design spin wheel games http://wheeldecide.com/

Conclusion Teacher summarises the key points of the lesson. Asks students if they have
5 mins any further questions. Discusses what the next lesson will entail (Time-
zone). Teacher assigns homework – completing the worksheet if it hasn’t
been completed in class and browsing the internet to look up five different
time zones as a preparation for next class. Teacher asks students for five
take home messages from what they have learned today.

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

MS11-3 Teacher and student questioning throughout lesson, timetable
worksheet and calculations.
MS11-4 Students working in pairs and helping each other perform
calculations based on time, students use internet to look for
different timetables and interpret them. They use apps to look
up timetables of public transport around their local areas.
MS11-10 Timetable worksheet.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 10

Academic Justification

The original lesson plan is well-structured and comprehensive, however there

are certain parts of the lesson plan that needed modifications to meet

requirements of Australian Professional standards for Teachers (APST) with

respect to differentiating instructions to meet specific learning needs of

students across the full range of abilities and Information and Communication

Technologies (ICT) (AITSL, 2016).

Standard 1.5 is addressed by modifying original worksheet activity into group

task, however providing flexibility of working alone to cater for students with

Autism Spectrum Disorder who prefer to work alone. Furthermore, the

addition of video and Internet assists in deeper understanding of the concept

for visual learners as well as other students. Under the framework provided by

APST, teachers are required to implement appropriate pedagogical strategies

such as well-crafted activities, visual cues, multimodal presentation of the

lesson to cater for students with different learning needs and abilities (Brahier,

2016; Tomlinson, 2005). This will help to explore students’ capabilities and

maximise learning outcomes (Gross & Sleap, 2001). Teacher can encourage

participation and increase engagement in classroom by designing challenging

learning materials and differentiated instructions (Kronborg & Plunkett, 2008).

Teacher can design challenging task for highly capable students as well as

providing extra support for students with learning difficulties to engage both

advanced learners and slow learners.

Similarly, collaborative learning can improve classroom engagement and

enhance critical thinking as it allows the analysis of the topic from multiple

perspectives (Chiu, 2008). Based on Vogostky’s zone of proximal

development theory, students abilities are unevenly distributed within the

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 11

group and students can learn efficiently from relatively competent peers than

doing the task on their own (as cited in Brahier, 2016).

On the other hand, the use of ICT was minimal in the original lesson plan,

which was addressed by incorporating interactive usage of ICT (standards 2.6,

3.4 and 4.5), such as addition of YouTube video and online game to keep

students engaged (Roblyer & Doering, 2013). According to Oldknow (2010),

internet can be used as the non-routine way of enforcing the key concepts

taught by the teachers by looking up information related to the topic. The

study conducted by Balanskat, Blamire and Kefala (2006) found that ICT

integration in lesson has enhanced students’ learning and improved

performance in mathematics. Furthermore, technology can be used to help

students in visualising abstract mathematical concepts and making it concrete

so, it is easy to retain for long time (Roblyer & Doering, 2013).

Moreover, there were improvements made in the NSW Quality Teaching

Model elements of higher-order thinking and explicit quality criteria (Gore,

2007; NSW Department of Education and Training, 2006). The original lesson

plan was predominantly teacher-driven so the addition of extension questions

and extra activities facilitates higher-order thinking in the form of problem

solving. Students might have prior knowledge and their own generalisations

about the topic and it is important to build on this knowledge when designing

the lesson plan. As factual knowledge along with procedural knowledge are

inevitable components in mathematics, it is also vital to understand that

students learn those knowledge better when they find the connection between

the topic and their own ideas on the topic (Brahier, 2016). Likewise, students

are more likely to be engaged and achieve higher performances when teacher

enables high-order thinking when teaching key concepts (Gore, 2007).

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 12

Therefore, extension questions and extra activities are incorporated in the

modified lesson plan to make students understand the value of learned

concept in outside world and allow students to apply this abstract

mathematical knowledge into their daily lives.

The final modification made to the lesson plan provided criteria for

measurement of quality of students’ work through a classroom-based rubric

for the activity, which aims to achieve the element of explicit quality criteria.

Guided instructions and setting clear expectations could help students

achieve higher outcomes however, most of the teachers lack the practice of

providing clear and precise expectations (Brahier, 2016). The clarification of

expectations could guide students to complete the task as well as improve the

quality of their work so teachers should set the criteria to evaluate students’

work (Gore, 2007). Thus, the introduction of the classroom-based rubric in the

lesson plan assists students in understanding what is expected of them from

this activity as well developing skills such as reflection and self-evaluation.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 13

References
Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT impact report: a

review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe. Retrieved from

http://colccti.colfinder.org/sites/default/files/ict_impact_report_0.pdf

Brahier, D. J. (2016). Teaching secondary and middle school mathematics

(4th ed.). New Jersey: Routledge.

Chiu, M. M. (2008). Flowing toward correct contributions during groups'

mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of

the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 415-463.

Gore, J. (2007). Making a difference : challenges for teachers, teaching, and

teacher education. In J. Butcher & L. McDonald (Eds.), Challenges for

teachers, teaching, and teacher education (pp. 15-32). Rotterdam, The

Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Gross, M. & Sleap, B. (2001). Literature Review on the Education of Gifted

and Talented Children. Gifted Education Research, Resource and

Information Centre (GERRIC), University of New South Wales: Sydney.

Kronborg, L., & Plunkett, M. (2008). Curriculum Differentiation: An Innovative

Australian Secondary School Program to Extend Academic Talent.

Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 17(1), 19-29.

NSW Department of Education and Training. (2006). Quality teaching in NSW

public schools (2nd ed.). Sydney: Professional Learning and Leadership

Development Directorate.

NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA). (2012). Outcomes. Tables of

Objectives and Outcomes-Continuum of Learning. Retrieved from

https://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/mathematics-standard-

stage6/outcomes-continuum-of-learning/

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 14

Oldknow, A. (2010). Teaching Mathematics Using ICT (3rd ed.). London:

Bloomsbury Publishing.

Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2013). Integrating educational technology

into teaching (6th ed.). Boston MA: Pearson.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Differentiation in practice : a resource guide for

differentiating curriculum, grades 9-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 15

Learning Portfolio web link

https://mneupane.weebly.com

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 16

Worksheet activity*

Five trains travel from Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry to London
Central on the same morning. The Hufflepuff Express leaves Hogwarts station
6 minutes after the Gryffindor Goods Train, but arrives 14 minutes before the
Slytherin All-Stations Train. The Gryffindor Goods Train takes 46 minutes to
reach London Central and arrives at 8:53am. The Ravenclaw Express leaves
10 minutes after the Hufflepuff Express and arrives 14 minutes before the
Gryffindor Goods Train. The Muggle-stops train is running 6 minutes late on
this particular morning, and arrives in London Central at 8:37, after leaving
Hogwarts 4 minutes before the Hufflepuff Express. The Slytherin All-Stations
Train takes 33 minutes to travel from Hogwarts to Central London, and arrives
46 minutes after the Hufflepuff Express leaves Hogwarts.

Work out the train timetable for the 5 trains.

Hogwarts London Central

Hufflepuff Express
Slytherin All-Stations
Gryffindor Goods
Train
Ravenclaw Express
Muggle-stops

1. What is the latest time train you could catch from Hogwarts to arrive at
London Central before 8:40am? What train is this?
2. Explain what would happen if the Ravenclaw Express train was running
7 minutes late.
3. Hannah misses the Hufflepuff Express train by 2 minutes. She needs
to be in London Central by 8:45am. What may be a possible solution
for her? Justify reasons for your answer.

Manisha Neupane (19172893) 17