Running Head: LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 1

Lesson Plan Critique

Mark Lamey

University of British Columbia

LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 2

Introduction
The selected lesson plans aims to have students at the grade two level work to understand

why a society has a division of labor (Appendix A). The construing of learning of this relatively

complex subject is primarily interpreted through the use of text and pictures, and presented in the

form of group report. Although the presence of numerous learning theories can be deciphered in

the existing lesson plan, In this revised critique (Appendix B) , I will identify what can be

interpreted as missed opportunities within the original lesson plan, and though relating them to

appropriate learning theories, including key aspects of Piagets theory of Cognitive development,

Vygotskian theory, and behaviourism, revise the original plan to utilization these learning

theories to greatly enhance the learning experience.

Lesson Plan Critique and modification through theory

It is expected by the end of the revised lesson plan that students will be able to define

why a society has a division of labor, while the existing plan explores students understanding of

the topic, it lacks a defined form of assessment that can be used to measure what learning has

taken place and if the objectives of the lesson have been achieved. Since, as Von Glasserfled

states, that knowledge is not a transferable commodity and communication not a conveyance

(2008, p??), the revision of this lesson will leverage the theories proposed for development of

the individual learner, believing that learning is based on the shared knowledge from the

community as well as from the experiences of their social environments (Glassman, 2008)

Piaget use of Cognitive Development

According to Piagets Theory of Cognitive Development, students at the age level

targeted in this lesson are on the cusp of two of the four developmental stages described by
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 3

Piaget Stages of Development. At age 7, grade two, students have a foot in the preoperational

stage (2-7 years) with its depiction of the child as one who struggles to see a view of the world

that is different than its own and concreate operational stage (7-11 years) where they can use

logical thought to problem solve but may struggle in thinking where the they are required to

postulate (Good, Mellon & Kromhout, 1978).

Piaget would posit that students cognitive development through these stages is

continually negotiation by the learner as they work to assimilate or accommodate new

knowledge into their existing understanding. This negotiation needs to be centered on real

actions that are carried out by the learner allowing them to draw meaning from previous

experiences or schema through assimilation (Good et al., 1978). New schemas need to be formed

when information does not fit into those previous experiences, therefore, this disruption of new

information to previous understanding of stimuli is used in the creation new schemas for success

in students learning (Good et al., 1978; Zhiqing & Zhiqing, 2015; Harlow, Cummings &

Aberasturi, 2007). The revised lesson in this critique will assess students existing experience and

actively challenge them in the construction of possible new interpretations of the lesson topic.

Behaviourism

This use of behaviorism in the existing lesson serves to provide boundaries and structure

to students as they work in a group structure. The use of this theoretical approach aims to

produce the desired behavioral responses allowing for the construction of knowledge to be

successful. Although the specific desired behaviours are developed and verbally communicated

to the teacher by the students in the group research component of the lesson, they are not

recorded as a visual reinforcement for the class to refer to throughout the lesson. The revised

plan will aspire to provide an environment that uses operant conditioning to reward parts of a
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 4

desired behavior or a random acts that approach it throughout the entire lesson (Standridge,

2007). The use of shaping students behavior by breaking down the overall behavioral goal into

discrete, concrete units, or positive movements will serve to reinforce the progress students make

with the learning objectives (Standridge, 2007).

Vygotsky social development of learning

Vygotsky emphasizes the role that social interactions place on the cognitive development

of learners (John-Stiener & Mahn, 1996). In the critiqued lesson plan, the socially constructed

approach for learning is used by groups of students to collaboratively construct knowledge with

the teacher acting in the role of MKO (more knowledgeable other). This approach to learning

acknowledges Vygotskys focus on interdependence of individual and group contributions in the

construction of knowledge (John-Stiener & Mahn, 1996). In the revised plan, the approach taken

would implore a similar approach but would additionally focus on Vygotskys Zone of Proximal

Development (ZPD) where student peers under the guidance and collaboration of an MKO, can

move the learner from their current level of cognitive development to a potential new level

(Vygotsky, 1978).

Conclusion

The purpose of expanding students understanding of the topic of this lesson will allow for

possible other cultural viewpoints gleaned from students experience that may not have been

explored in the original lesson plan. By creating a community of enquiry/ community of practice

by using the learning theories of Piaget, Vygotsky and Behaviourism, the goal of this revised

lesson on Why a society has a division of labor, is to make a learner centered lesson showing
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 5

how students both challenge an support each other with the goal of leading to effective learning

(Anderson, 2008).
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 6

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.)

Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Chapter 2 (pp. 45-74).

Glassman, M. (1994). All things being equal: the two roads of Piaget and Vygotsky.

Developmental Review, 14, 186-214.

Good, R., Mellon, E. K., Kromhout, R. A. (1978). The work of Jean Piaget. Journal of Chemical

Engineering, 55, 688-693.

John-Steiner, V. & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A

Vygotskian framework, Educational Psychologist, 31, 191-206.

Standridge, M.. (2002). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning,

teaching, and technology.

Steve Harlow , Rhoda Cummings & Suzanne M. Aberasturi (2007) Karl Popper and Jean Piaget:

A Rationale for Constructivism, The Educational Forum, 71:1, 41-48,

von Glasersfeld, E. (2008). Learning as constructive activity. AntiMatters, 2(3), 33-49. Retrieved

from http://anti-matters.org/articles/73/public/73-66-1-PB.pdf

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society [PDF]. Retrieved from

http://www.cles.mlc.edu.tw/~cerntcu/099-curriculum/Edu_Psy/EP_03_New.pdf

Zhiqing, Z., & Zhang Zhiqing. (01/01/2015). International forum of teaching and studies:

Assimilation, accommodation, and equilibration: A schema-based perspective on

translation as process and as product American Scholars Press.

LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 7

Appendix A: Lesson Plan - Original

LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 8
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 9
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 10

Appendix B: Lesson Plan Revised

Lesson Plan: Why does society have a division of labor (Grade two)
This is a group constructed activity, duration 1.5 hours
OBJECTIVES:

Investigate different meanings of work.

explore the roles needed in the creation of goods
Create a visual representations of roles people undertake in the creation of an object
prepare and deliver a group story that includes all the images created by individual group
members
MATERIALS:

drawing material, (pencil, paper, markers, computer software)

large chart paper (to record students devised rules of conduct and questions/comments
that individuals/groups have regarding the discussion around the lesson topic )
Objects used for lesson hook (produced objects of interest ex: pocket watch, water
fountain, bicycle, toy, etc)
Construction materials (pipe cleaners, paper plates, take, glue, newspaper, wood blocks,
plasticine, found objects, cardboard boxes etc)

CLASSROOM PROCEDURE:

Hook
Students will be shown a readymade object as described from above and be asked if they have
ever seen anything similar. Answers will be recorded. Students will then be told a story of the
object relating pertinent information about it. What it is made from, where it is used, when it is
used. The teacher will then prompt students to create an image of who they would think played a
part in the creation of that object.

In Class
A) Whole Class:
Students will display their creations for the whole class to view. Discussions lead by the teacher
will probe students on their creations to ascertain their reasoning for the creation of their images
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 11

and how students perceive the different roles needed in the creation of the object. The teacher
will record students responses. (15 minutes)

B) Group Activity:

1) Form groups and assign 3 or 4 students to each group. Groups will decide on a group name
used for peer assessment. Groups are then given 5 minutes to discuss with their groups and
report to the teacher on behavioral best practices for group work and staying on task. Discussion
will also include any corrective measure that can be applied if needed. The teacher will provide
any prompting for omitted behaviors that are required for group success and record the groups
input on flip paper for visual review should corrections be needed as the lesson progresses. The
teacher will mingle from group to group during the lesson to provide positive feedback for those
on task.

2) Groups will discuss and record what object they would like to create from the materials
provided (descried in the materials section), before beginning constructing they will need to
agree on:

o What the object is

o What function does it serve
o How much would it cost if it were for sale
o How many people would be needed to operate it

One group member will be assigned the role of recorder to write down agreed on answers for this
section.

3) Group members will then collaboratively work together to construct the object based on the
answers provided above. 30 minutes

4) On completion of the object, groups will construct a story around the object based on the
questions from item (2) and present their object to the class. (5 minutes each group)

5) All students will have an opportunity to ask questions about each groups presentation (5
minutes for each group presenting)

C) Individual

1) Teacher will lead questioning regarding students understanding of the lesson topic, based on
the questions students answered above:

o How did you decide who would do what in the creation of your object?
o Based on what each group member contributed, do you think the work performed on this
object is worth more, less or the same for each group member and why?
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 12

o Did your plan for creating your object change after you got started and if so why?
o What could you have done different to make the process go better?

The teacher will record all answers for each group so as to be visible to all groups and draw
comparisons with answers when applicable.
2) Students will peer assess each groups presentation based on the assessment below.

D) Assessment
1) Assessment (Peer)

Group Name: Place an X in the square below for your

selection
Category Excellent Very Good
Good
Creativity:
Did the group use the materials
in a unique way in making their
products?
Answered required questions:
Did the group give a clear
answer to all the questions
required in the creation of their
object?
Presentation:
Was the groups presentation
clearly delivered with all
members of the group
participating?

(teacher)

2) Formative assessment through group/individual observation

3) Performance checklist

Group Name:

Did the group work together o

collaboratively?
LESSON PLAN CRITIQUE 13

Did the group assign roles to individual o

group members?

Did all members contribute in group o

dynamic?

Did group follow behavioral guidelines? o

Did all group members contribute to group o

presentation?

Was group able to clearly answer questions o

about story during presentation from peers

Did group record in writing answers to o

questions pertaining to their objects story