Wayne State University College of Education

Lesson Planning Framework for Effective Instructional Design

Teaching Intern(s):Daniel Sute
School in which the lesson is being taught: Geer Park Elementary
Grade level of students for whom the lesson was developed: 4th Grade
Subject/content area(s) for the lesson: math: mental math computation
strategies
Title of the lesson: extension of near doubles into 3 digit numbers
Time needed for lesson: 15 minutes

Describe what portions of the lesson went well and why.

o I went into this lesson hoping to focus on student with-it-ness. I
think I did a good job keeping my focus on my students during
this lesson. As I focussed on transcribing what strategies one
student was describing, my mind was noticing if students were
following along. I had several successful redirections of attention
for students that werent following along. For example, while
most of the students were thinking of strategies, I personally
spoke to M.J. to tell him to prepare a strategy so that I could ask
him to share. He smiled and did prepare a strategy. Another
example of this was in making eye contact with LN.., and simply
nudging my head towards the board, which focussed her
attention. She quickly found a strategy after that. I also
redirected students that werent using the appropriate hand
signals by simply modeling with a certain expression on my face
what hand signals were expected, and they redirected their own
behavior. Finally, I had a similar interaction with H.A. as I did with
M.J.. With H.A., however, I only had to say, I need you to sit up
and think of a strategy, buddy. and he immediately sat up and
expressed regret for having let his attention slip, but in a non
threatened manner, smiling, he got back on track. I believe that
H.A. felt safe and non threatened by this interaction and
expressed internally that he wanted to focus on his own, not just
because I told him to.
There was, in general, good participation by a wide variety of the
students. My mentor teacher noted afterwards that there was
very good participation, noticing how multiple students who
rarely participate during Number Talks eagerly shared strategies.
M.J. was one of those students, who shared a strategy after the
redirection which I noted above. Another student who shared was

T.M., who rarely feels confident enough to share. The rapport I

have built with T.M. through lots of encouragement, positive
reinforcement and individual conversations and attention might
have encouraged him to stay engaged in my lesson, work
towards his own strategy, and eagerly volunteer to share.

Describe the portions/aspects of the lesson that did not go

as planned and why.

The discussions which were planned ahead of time did not spring into
the depth of discussion which I had hoped for. The initial question I
asked, which was supposed to simply spur a quick recall about why we
use doubles when doing mental math, did not go as planned. I expected
this answer to come quickly so that we could move on with what really
mattered in the lesson. However, when I asked F.A., she did not exactly
answer why we use doubles, but instead answered why we like to work
with tens, or, numbers with 0s at the end of them. I did not want to shut
down her thinking, because number talks are not supposed to be about
using one strategy but about using many strategies. I tried to work with
her to articulate what strategy she was describing, but while feeling like
we couldnt spend too much time on this question, since it was supposed
to be a brief introduction, I didnt really ever arrive at what a double was.
Thus, the students may not have had a clear picture of what finding a
double meant before beginning our number talk, which was the main
purpose of the introduction.
Another question which did not spur the sort of conversation that I
hoped for included a question which was meant to determine the
difference between 2 different strategies which students shared. I called
a student who was not sure how to go about looking for a difference
between the two strategies, and she froze after I called on her. I tried to
give her enough wait time, but my concern with pacing may have made
her nervous and she couldnt come up with an answer until I pointed to
the place where I saw the difference, and then she could articulate what
that student did differently than the other students strategy expressed
next to his on the board.
This lesson went much longer than planned for. As an instructor, I
made the decision to focus on lengthier questions of higher level
thinking, including the analyzing through comparing and contrasting
question noted above. Keeping in mind the intended brevity of the
lesson, I might have done better to keep the automatic recall formative
assessments such as voting for the most efficient strategy and giving a
two-finger sign if a double was used rather than use the lengthier

discussion questions and ultimately forego these formative assessments

for the sake of time. If I would have kept the more automatic responses, I
would not have had feedback of higher order thinking, but I would have
had feedback from many more students about the objectives which were
actually the intention of the lesson - that students could identify what
strategy was being used, and could evaluate which one was more
efficient of 3 given options.

Discuss what you would do differently next time to better

support your students learning.

If I were to do this lesson again, I would forego preplanning discussion

questions as these actually detracted from the flow of the lesson. I would
preplan check-in formative assessments that were more directly related
to my lesson objectives, such as those originally planned for in this
lesson. These check-ins would have done a better job of assessing if
students were moving towards my actual objectives. Furthermore, out of
these simpler assessments more in-depth discussion could have
emerged, rather than from an alternate source of questioning which was
pre planned to work side by side with these check-ins (which were
omitted entirely for the sake of time.)
I dont consider preplanning these questions to have been a total loss.
They helped me begin to think about how such higher level thinking
questions can be worked into a number talk lesson. However, these
questions should emerge naturally based on the noted confusion
amongst students in the midst of a lesson. If a question does not guide
students through a noted hurtle towards accomplishing an objective, it
does not necessarily need to be delved into.
Next time I give a number talk, I will try to adjust the balance a bit more
towards the weight of giving students the chance to share their
strategies and a bit less towards talking about the strategies shared. It
was a good idea to discuss the strategies being shared, but it may have
gone a little too far in this given lesson.

Provide evidence from the lesson that allows you to

determine whether or not each of the outcomes for the lesson
were met.

Most of the students seemed to express a mastery of the first objective. I

heard from 8 different students, and I selected these 8 students from the
3 different groupings of the students by ability level. Each strategy

showed fluency in manipulating numbers to mentally adjust complex

numbers into simpler numbers to work with. Multiple students, however,
thought themselves ready to express a strategy even though they had
not found an answer. This indicates that they had an idea of something
they would like to work out with the teacher on the board, but had not
effectively worked out this strategy in their own mind mentally, which
was the purpose of the lesson. It seems as though students need more
wait time and reminders that they need to use their strategies to come
to an answer in their own minds before sharing.
Unfortunately, because I decided to omit the check-ins which were
supposed to determine if students could recognize which of a given
number of strategies was the most efficient, I do not have evidence from
the lesson that proves that students accomplished this task. I also do not
have evidence from the lesson that shows if students were able to
recognize what strategy was used in which expression of a strategy on
the board. However, I believe that students had a grasp of how to use
doubles in mental math, since every student used a double in the
strategy that they provided. The opening questioning indicates that
the students are less familiar with articulating what finding a
double actually means, since F.A. thought she was describing
the double strategy when she was actually describing finding a
ten, and she clearly seemed confused when I explained why
what she said was not finding a double.

Describe how you will use data from the assessment

portion of your lesson to inform future lessons. For
example, consider what you would do if a significant
portion of the students did not do as well as expected in
one or more of the assessments.

The opening questioning process listed above indicates that students are
unclear that there is a difference between finding a double and making tens.
It could be beneficial for a number talk to be given which would highlight
when to make a ten, and when to make doubles, to most efficiently solve a
problem. Additionally, students seemed quite excited with S.Js strategy,
which was very interesting and complicated with the number of steps that he
took and how he manipulated numbers, but was also very inefficient. It
seems like students are having fun playing with the numbers, and that is
great, but that is not ultimately the point of number talks. The point is to
help students formulate their own strategies to most efficiently solve math
problems in their head. A number talk focussing explicitly on evaluating
efficiency could be beneficial, to show that strategies that can take down a
math problem with the least amount of steps and with the least stretches of

the mind are the best strategies for the purposes of mental math. Students
could use a reminder of why we are doing number talks; to devise strategies
for mental math, and not just to have fun playing with numbers on the board,
as beneficial as this is in its own right.
Ultimately, being able to couple conversations about efficiently with
conversations about definably distinct strategies can help students evaluate
different strategies for different problems in their own heads before even
applying them. Explicitly naming and applying the distinct strategies of
making tens and using doubles could help students more efficiently decide
what strategy to chose in given situations. It could help students
metacognitively think about what strategy they are doing if they understand
the differences between strategies they are using during number talks.