The "COE Lesson Plan Template" is based on Universal Design for Learning. Research other lesson planning formats (5E, Madeline Hunter, etc.)

Sample Solution

COE Lesson Plan (UDL) vs. 5E Lesson Plan

Discussion Question 1

The "COE Discussion Question 1 Lesson Plan Template" is explicitly grounded in the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). UDL is a framework that aims to create learning environments that are accessible and effective for all learners, regardless of their individual differences. It focuses on providing multiple means of representation (what), multiple means of action and expression (how), and multiple means of engagement (why) (CAST, 2018).

In contrast, the 5E Lesson Plan Model is a widely used, inquiry-based approach that structures learning experiences through five distinct phases: Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate (Bybee et al., 2006).

Advantages and Disadvantages:

COE Lesson Plan (UDL):

• Advantages:

  • Accessibility and Inclusivity: The primary advantage of the UDL-based template is its inherent focus on meeting the diverse needs of all learners from the outset. By proactively planning for multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement,

Full Answer Section

• • Flexibility and Differentiation: The UDL framework encourages teachers to think flexibly about how content is presented, how students demonstrate their learning, and how they are motivated. This naturally leads to differentiated instruction that caters to various learning styles, strengths, and challenges.
  • Promotes Deeper Understanding: By engaging students through multiple pathways and encouraging active participation in ways that resonate with them, UDL can foster deeper understanding and retention of concepts.
  • Supports Self-Regulation: Providing multiple options for engagement and expression can empower students to become more self-directed learners who understand their own learning preferences and can make choices that support their success.

• Disadvantages:

  • Initial Planning Time: Developing a UDL-based lesson can require more upfront planning time as teachers need to consider various options and potential barriers for diverse learners.
  • Complexity: Implementing UDL effectively requires a deep understanding of the framework and its principles, which can be a learning curve for some educators.
  • Resource Intensive: Providing multiple means of representation, action, and engagement may require a wider range of resources and materials.
  • Potential for Overwhelm: If not carefully structured, providing too many options could potentially overwhelm some students.

5E Lesson Plan:

• Advantages:

  • Inquiry-Based Learning: The 5E model promotes active student engagement and exploration, encouraging them to construct their own understanding through inquiry.
  • Structured Approach: The five distinct phases provide a clear and logical structure for lesson development and delivery, making it easy for teachers to follow.
  • Facilitates Conceptual Change: The sequence of engage, explore, explain, and elaborate is designed to help students confront prior misconceptions and develop more accurate understandings.
  • Emphasis on Application: The elaborate phase encourages students to apply their learning in new contexts, promoting deeper understanding and transfer of knowledge.

• Disadvantages:

  • Limited Explicit Focus on Learner Diversity: While the 5E model encourages active learning, it doesn't inherently mandate the proactive planning for diverse learner needs in the same way that UDL does. Differentiation might be an afterthought rather than an integral part of the design.
  • Potential for Passive Participation: In some implementations, the "explain" phase can become teacher-centered, potentially leading to passive learning if not facilitated effectively.
  • Linearity: The linear progression through the five phases might not always accommodate the diverse paces and pathways of learning for all students. Some students might need more time in the "explore" phase, while others might grasp concepts more quickly.
  • Assessment Primarily at the End: While the "evaluate" phase is crucial, formative assessment and ongoing monitoring of student understanding throughout the lesson might not be as explicitly embedded as in a UDL framework, which emphasizes continuous assessment to inform instructional adjustments.

Which Format Best Represents My Vision for Instructional Planning?

My vision for instructional planning aligns most closely with the COE Lesson Plan Template based on Universal Design for Learning. While I value the inquiry-based approach of the 5E model and believe in the power of student exploration and discovery, my primary goal is to create learning environments that are truly equitable and accessible for all learners from the outset.

UDL's proactive and systematic approach to addressing learner variability resonates deeply with my belief that every student deserves the opportunity to learn and succeed. By intentionally designing lessons with multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement, I can anticipate and reduce potential barriers to learning, allowing students to access the curriculum, demonstrate their understanding, and engage with the material in ways that best suit their individual strengths and needs.

While the initial planning for UDL might be more time-consuming, I believe the long-term benefits of creating inclusive and effective learning experiences for all outweigh this initial investment. I envision a classroom where diversity is not seen as a challenge but as an opportunity to enrich learning for everyone. UDL provides the framework to achieve this vision by promoting flexibility, choice, and meaningful engagement for a wide range of learners.

Link to 5E Lesson Plan Example:

https://science.nsta.org/enewsletter/2017-09/pdfs/201709-5E.pdf (National Science Teaching Association example)

Literacy Standard Activity and Assessment

Discussion Question 2

Selected Standard: Common Core State Standard for English Language Arts, Grade 1: CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.1.3b - Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.

Learning Activity: "Word Building with Magnetic Letters"

Description: This activity will engage students in actively manipulating magnetic letters to build and decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.

1. Introduction (Representation & Engagement): The teacher will begin by reviewing previously learned phonics patterns (e.g., short vowel sounds, consonant blends, digraphs) using visual aids (letter cards, charts) and interactive questioning. The teacher will then introduce the activity, explaining that students will be building words using magnetic letters and reading them aloud. To enhance engagement, the activity can be framed as a "word detective" challenge.
2. Guided Practice (Representation, Action & Expression, & Engagement): The teacher will model the process of building and decoding a few one-syllable words on a magnetic board (e.g., "cat," "ship," "frog"). The teacher will explicitly sound out each letter and blend the sounds to read the whole word. Students will then work in small groups or pairs, each with a set of magnetic letters and a word list (differentiated based on their current decoding level). The word lists will contain regularly spelled one-syllable words aligned with the target phonics patterns. The teacher will circulate, providing support and guidance as needed, encouraging students to sound out each letter and blend the sounds. Students can express their understanding by building the words and reading them aloud to their group or partner.
3. Independent Practice (Action & Expression & Engagement): Students will then work independently with a new differentiated word list. They will build each word with their magnetic letters and write the word on a recording sheet. To increase engagement, students can earn "word detective" points for each correctly built and written word. Students will have choices in how they demonstrate their understanding – they can read their words to the teacher individually, record themselves reading the words, or use the words in simple sentences.
4. Sharing and Reflection (Representation & Engagement): At the end of the activity, students will share some of the words they built and read. The teacher will facilitate a brief reflection on the strategies they used for decoding and any challenges they encountered.

Assessment of Student Learning:

Student learning of the standard (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.1.3b - Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words) will be assessed through a combination of observation and a "Word Decoding Checklist."

• Observation: Throughout the activity, the teacher will observe students as they build and read words, noting their strategies, accuracy, and fluency. The teacher will pay attention to whether students are correctly applying learned phonics patterns and blending sounds.
• Word Decoding Checklist: Each student will be assessed using a simple checklist during the independent practice or sharing portion of the activity. The checklist will include a selection of regularly spelled one-syllable words (aligned with the standard and differentiated based on student needs). The teacher will mark whether the student can accurately decode each word. The checklist will focus on:
  • Correctly identifying individual sounds within the word.
  • Accurately blending the sounds to read the whole word.
  • Demonstrating automaticity in decoding familiar patterns.

Alignment:

• Standard (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RF.1.3b): The standard explicitly focuses on the ability to decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.
• Learning Activity ("Word Building with Magnetic Letters"): The activity directly supports the instruction of this standard by providing students with hands-on practice in manipulating letters to build and sound out one-syllable words. The guided practice provides explicit modeling, and the independent practice allows students to apply their decoding skills. The differentiation ensures that students are working with words at their appropriate level.
• Assessment (Observation & Word Decoding Checklist): The assessment methods directly measure students' ability to decode regularly spelled one-syllable words. Observation allows for formative assessment of their strategies during the activity, while the Word Decoding Checklist provides a summative measure of their accuracy in decoding specific words aligned with the standard. The checklist focuses on the key skill of decoding, ensuring alignment with the learning objective and the standard itself. The multiple means of expression during independent practice also allow students to demonstrate their learning in a way that suits them.

By aligning the standard, learning activity, and assessment in this way, the teacher can effectively instruct and evaluate students' progress in decoding regularly spelled one-syllable words, a foundational skill for early literacy development.

References:

CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org

Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. BSCS.