For your final peer-graded assignment, we’re asking you to synthesize what you’ve learned in this course about STEM teaching by drafting a lesson plan for a topic you might teach to undergraduates one day. Where the first peer-graded assignment focused on content (learning objectives) and the second focused on process (learning activities), this one requires you to bring content and process together—along with assessment methods and strategies for inclusive teaching.
To complete this assignment, you’ll need to submit a 2-3 page lesson plan focused on a single class session you might teach. You’ll also respond to a series of questions asking you to reflect on the choices you made as you designed your lesson, and to connect those choices to the principles and practices discussed in this course. It’s your responses to these questions that will be evaluated by your peers, with your lesson plan as context.
Although there’s no standard format for undergraduate STEM lesson plans, we’re asking you to use a specific format for this assignment to make it easier for your peers—who may be in different disciplines—to make sense of your lesson plan. The lesson plan you submit should include the following sections, each clearly marked:
Context – Describe a course you might teach in which you would use this lesson plan. Identify the kinds of students (e.g., for majors, non-majors, freshman or seniors) you would expect to see in this course, as well as how many students might be in the course. If it seems relevant, include information on the course schedule (e.g. 50-minute class sessions three times a week) and physical environment (e.g. lecture hall with stadium seating, lab with multiple benches) you can imagine for this course.
Objectives – What learning objectives do you have for this lesson? Be as specific as you feel is appropriate, but bear in mind that your peer evaluator might not be in your discipline, so mind your jargon. Remember Bloom’s taxonomy.
Activities – What learning activities have you planned for this lesson? Your description should give a good sense of how you’re planning to use class time and what you’ll ask your students to do during class. Although the focus of your lesson plan should be a single class session, feel free to describe learning activities that would occur before and/or after that class session. You need not draft slides or handouts or other materials, although you may find it helpful to include talking points or instructions to students in your lesson plan.
Assessments – What formal or informal assessments have you planned to know if you’ve met your learning objectives? You need not draft specific exam questions, but you should identify when and how you will determine the extent to which you learning objectives have been met either through formative and/or summative assessment methods Assessments might come during the class session described above or later in the course.
Objectives – How have you followed recommended practices in identifying your learning objectives? In particular, have you expressed your goals in terms of what students will achieve or be able to do? Are your goals well-defined and measurable? Are they at appropriate levels of Bloom’s taxonomy?
Misconceptions – What potential student misconceptions have you identified in your lesson plan? How have you planned to surface and respond to these misconceptions?
Practice & Feedback – What opportunities for students to have meaningful practice and feedback have you planned for this lesson? What kinds of feedback would you expect students to receive and from whom?
Inclusive Teaching – What aspects of your lesson plan are intended to create a learning environment that welcomes full participation by all students? Why might they do so? Have you planned activities that might leverage the diversity of perspectives and experiences among your students?
Sequencing – Why have you sequenced the learning activities you describe in your lesson plan in the order you have planned them?
Alignment – What are 2 or 3 ways your objectives, assessments, and activities are in alignment? Be specific about connections you have planned among these three components.
Evidence-Based Practices – How has research on STEM teaching and learning, including but not limited to studies mentioned in this course, informed the teaching choices you made as you planned your lesson?
See the peer-graded assignment itself for the criteria on which your responses to these questions will be evaluated.
As Derek mentioned in the intro video for this week, teaching can be a very creative act. Feel free to be creative when you design your lesson plans this week.
You’re also invited to post your lesson plans in the discussion forums, either to solicit informal feedback or just to share. You never know what someone else will find inspiring when they look at your lesson plan!
Excellent (4 points) – Clearly connects lesson plan objectives with multiple recommended best practices (e.g. student-oriented goals, measurable goals).
Good (3 points) – Clearly connects lesson plan objectives with one recommended best practice (e.g. student-oriented goals, measurable goals).
Acceptable (2 points) – Seems to have thoughtful lesson plan objectives, but doesn’t make clear connections to best practices.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that lesson plan objectives are appropriate.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Identifies at least one student misconception, along with a plan to surface and respond to it.
Good (3 points) – Identifies at least one student misconception, along with a plan to surface, but not respond, to it.
Acceptable (2 points) – Identifies a potential student misconception relevant to the lesson plan topic, but no plan for dealing with it.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that possible student misconceptions were considered in the lesson plan.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Identifies lesson plan activities likely to provide students with meaningful practice and feedback on that practice.
Good (3 points) – Identifies lesson plan activities likely to provide students with meaningful practice, but not useful feedback on that practice.
Acceptable (2 points) – Some attempt at considering the need for practice and feedback, but no concrete plans for doing so.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that the need for practice and feedback was considered in the lesson plan.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Identifies aspects of the lesson plan consistent with inclusive teaching practices also likely to leverage student diversity.
Good (3 points) – Identifies aspects of the lesson plan consistent with inclusive teaching practices.
Acceptable (2 points) – Some attempt at fostering an inclusive classroom climate, but without concrete plans to do so.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that the importance of inclusive teaching was considered in the lesson plan.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Clearly articulates sensible reasons for the sequence of learning activities in the lesson plan, including pre- or post-class activities.
Good (3 points) – Clearly articulates sensible reasons for the sequence of in-class learning activities in the lesson plan.
Acceptable (2 points) – Some attempt at justifying the sequence of learning activities in the lesson plan.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that the lesson plan reflects an intentional sequencing of learning activities.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Identifies clear alignments among objectives, assessments, and activities (all three).
Good (3 points) – Identifies clear alignments among objectives, assessments, and activities (any two).
Acceptable (2 points) – Some alignments among objectives, assessments, and activities, but these aren’t clearly articulated.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that objectives, assessments, and activities are in alignment.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?
Excellent (4 points) – Draws a clear and appropriate connection between some aspect of the lesson plan and research on STEM teaching and learning, with citation.
Good (3 points) – Draws a clear and appropriate connection between some aspect of the lesson plan and research on STEM teaching and learning, no citation.
Acceptable (2 points) – Identifies relevant research on STEM teaching and learning, but does not draw a clear connection to the lesson plan.
Poor (1 point) – No evidence that research on STEM teaching and learning was considered when planning the lesson.
Please provide a comment or two to explain your score. What strengths did you see in the response? How might it have been improved?