102086 Designing Teaching & Learning

Assignment 2: QT Analysis Template

EMlLY DATE - 19561354

Evaluate the lesson plan according to the following NSW Quality Teaching model elements.

Evaluation score – refer to NSW QTM Classroom Practice Guide for each element
Comments incl. evidence for evaluation score (2 sentences)

1 Intellectual quality
1.1 Deep knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Lesson does link to key concepts and their relationships. Students are to list
what makes their community liveable, however no links to other units or other cultures way
of living.

1.2 Deep understanding

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students are asked to evaluate why people live in places that they deemed less
‘liveable’ this should start an intelligent discussion that allows students to demonstrate the
their understanding of the main ideas, and the links between them. Group activity also
facilities this.

1.3 Problematic knowledge

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Lesson only refers to western civilisation’s ideals of place and living, there are
no cross culture references or question of ‘knowledge’.

1.4 Higher-order thinking

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Limited higher order thinking,

1.5 Metalanguage
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Two key syllabus definitions are included, but teacher does not expand on them
or any others.

1.6 Substantive communication

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students are asked to identify elements of a liveable environment, however they
are not asked to expand or explain why they feel that way. The class discussion may
facilitate some substantiative communication.

Quality learning environment

2.1 Explicit quality criteria
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students are not given clear criteria of what is expected for group work activity.
However having the students share their answers with the class, would have made them
think more about the answers the were producing.

2.2 Engagement
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments:
Most of the activities involved student directed learning, that should have produced genuine
interest. Although some activities, like going through the ‘advanced organisers’ and the
photo activity may have declined engagement.
2.3 High expectations
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: There was little to no expectations expected of the students. Besides knowing
that their work was going to be displayed on the board, the expectations of the quality of
work was quite low.

2.4 Social support

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Teacher did offer support throughout the lesson, and had strategies to help
facilitate a class discussion. However made no mention to how she would foster an
encouraging learning environment for all students.

1
 2.5 Students’ self-regulation
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Although there were many different tasks, there were no extension activities
that students could continue with if they finished their work early. Hence they may have
found it difficult to self-regulate, especially being that it was the first unit of the new topic.

2.6 Student direction

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Although the tasks are student directed and controlled, they are highly
scaffolded with little room for students to contribute to the content of the task.

3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students are asked to compare different living conditions and to compare them
to neighbourhoods around them. However, instead of recognising the vast array of different
students’ knowledge on cultures and way of life, they are instead presented with a binary
opinion on what constitutes a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ way of living.

3.2 Cultural knowledge

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments:

3.3 Knowledge integration

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: No connections were made to other subject areas or prior learning.

3.4 Inclusivity
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: No mention was made to how the teacher aimed to include everyone in the
class.
3.5 Connectedness
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students were asked to evaluate living spaces based on the classroom
learnings/definitions of liveability and place. However tasks were based off one photograph
that had no other context connected with it. There was little connection made to connect the
outside world to what was being taught.

3.6 Narrative
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: No use of stories/narratives in the lesson.

Identifying Areas for Improvement

Identify the four NSW QT model elements you are targeting for improvement.

QT model
1) 2.6 Student direction 2) Connectedness
3) Explicit quality criteria 4) Social Support

2
 Lesson Plan

Topic area: Stage of Learner: 4 Syllabus Pages:

Place & Liveability 48-49

Date: Term 2: Week Location Booked: J4 Lesson Number: 1 / 25

One/Period One
Time: 60 minutes Total Number of students Printing/preparation,
30  Advanced Organiser to
give to students for
review at home,
 Google Earth,
 Scaffold for power point
presentations
 Assessment task
notification

Outcomes Assessment Students learn about Students learn to

Informal, formative
assessment Introduction to Place and Investigate factors that
Syllabus outcomes *Diagnostic Pre- Liveability and Influence influence perceptions of the
GE4-1- Locates and describes the testing during and Perceptions liveability of places.
diverse features and introductory activity
characteristics of a range of places *Participation in class
and environments. discussions
GE4-7- Acquires and processes * Assessment of
geographical information by capabilities during
selecting and using geographical visual representation
tools for inquiry. exercises

CROSS CIRCULUM THEMES AND GENERAL CAPABILITIES EXPLICIT SUBJECT SPECIFIC CONCEPTS AND SKILLS

Asia and Australia’s engagement with Asia: “The first key

concept highlights the diversity within and between the
countries of the Asia region, from their cultures, societies
and traditions through to their diverse environments and
the effects of these on the lives of people.” (ACARA 2018)

3
Time Teaching and learning actions
5
Students line up outside and enter the classroom in an orderly fashion. Ask students to take their seats
and pull out their books and writing utensils.

10
Writing Activity-

Provide students with their advanced organisers, explain the importance of this and highlight key
concepts such key learning outcomes. Ask students to look over this at home and post any questions
that they may have about it on the class forum. This will be their homework.

Explain to the class that they are about to begin a new unit of work as they can see on the board- place
and liveability. Provide students with Australian Curriculum definitions of Place, Liveability and
Liveability criteria below. Ask them to copy the definitions into their workbooks, as these will be used
to assist them with the following activities.

“Liveability: An assessment of what a place is like to live in, using particular criteria, for example,
environmental quality, crime and safety, education and health provision, access to shops and services,
recreational facilities and cultural activities.” (Australian Curriculum, n.d)

“Place: A part of the earth’s surface that is identified and given meaning by people, which may be
perceived, experienced, understood and valued differently.” (Australian Curriculum, n.d)

“Liveability criteria: Characteristics used to assess the liveability of places or their contribution to
people’s quality of life e.g. safety, healthcare, education, infrastructure and environment.

15 Begin a collaborative class brain storm on the board, taking answers from each student. This will act as
a form of assessment of prior knowledge on the topic. The brain storm will be on “Factors influencing
perceptions of the liveability of places”
Encourage discussion around;
- Environmental factors (e.g. Climate and Natural resources)
- Human Factors (e.g. socioeconomic status, culture, employment and crime)
- Liveability criteria

25 Visual Representations Activity:

Place the students in groups of four, ensure that they have mixed abilities. (6 groups total)
Each group will have two IPads. (Student directed)
Explain that they will have only 15 minutes to complete this task
Students will then work together in finding information on a designated place and assess the liveability.
The places include:
- Beijing, China (Cross curriculum)
- Queensland, Australia
- Palawan, Philippines (Cross curriculum)

4
 Ensure that there are two of each place in the classroom, this will help to facilitate an intelligent
conversation as students will be able to offer different opinions and outlooks.
Encourage students to use a range of resources including Google Earth to ‘walk’ the streets of the
community/place.
In their groups, ask students to complete a power point presentation in the class google slides, (there
will be a scaffold/outline that they must follow), explain that this will be marked and used as a class
resource throughout the term. Students should include pictures and information in each column.
- Assign TWO students in each group to do the research and TWO students to start making the
presentation.
- Ensure that the tasks delegated are reflecting each students ability and strengths.
- Continue to walk around the classroom to offer assistance and support being mindful of the
language being used.

They must also answer the following for each place:

1. Assess the liveability of each place. Include at least one feature you observe that makes this
place liveable and at least one feature that makes you feel less likely to want to live there.
While students are completing this activity, spend some time with each group to ensure that students
are on task and on the right track.

40
Access the presentations online and display them at the front of the room. Discuss the answers and
places as class and add in any information they may have missed.

Answers should include factors such as:

Environmental: climate, natural hazards, natural resources, natural hazards, air & water quality.
Social Factors: Culture, public spaces, community
Human Factors: access to services, safety/ crime, income, work opportunities, technology.

50 Class Discussion:
Although some of these cities demonstrated that some places are less liveable than others, ask
students ‘Why do people still live in these places?’

Facilitate class discussion and ensure that discussion includes mention of the following:
- poverty and lack of ability to move
- opportunities for work
- family ties and connections to the land

If students are not able to come up with these answers the question could be rephrased using some of
the pictures and the answers the students provided: “If you lived in this town, with this violence, why
would you need to still live here?”

5
60 Set Homework: Ask students to read through the Google slides and Advanced organisers at home and
make any notes about anything that may be unclear. This will be discussed further in the next lesson.
Ask students if there are any other questions and when the bell rings ask the students to pack up their
belongings and leave the room.

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

GE4-1- locates and describes the Students will engage in a collaborative class discussion, that
diverse features and is facilitated by the teacher to get an instant idea of the
characteristics of a range of level of knowledge students already have on the topic.
places and environments.

GE4-7- acquires and processes
geographical information by
selecting and using geographical
tools for inquiry.
Students are to work in groups to research and interpret
different cities and identify features that make that these
places liveable as well as features observed, that may make
the place less appealing to live in. Students will have an
opportunities to improve their ICT skills, particularly in
Microsoft office as they will have to create a
PowerPoint that encompasses all of the relevant
information needed to answer the scaffold as well as
including informative pictures.
Furthermore, informal formative assessment will also
occur, as the PowerPoints will be presented in front of the
class and later marked.

6
REFLECTION – Emily Date 19561354

Although this lesson met the syllabus outcomes to was aiming to achieve, it lacked elements of
student direction, explicit quality criteria, connectedness and social support. Applying the NSW
quality teaching model (Gore 2007) elements of the lesson were enhanced to better reflect the
standards.

The original lesson plan created did show some attempts to be student directed, with students
being placed into groups to complete a worksheet. However due to the fact that students only
had to fill out a scaffolded worksheet based on a picture that was printed prior to lesson it lacked
substance, higher order thinking and student directed learning. This was a missed opportunity to
utilise Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Trimmel and Bachmann (2004) found a
direct link between the use of technology in the classroom and increased participation rates,
interests in learning and motivation. Allowing the students to use IPads and/or laptops to conduct
the activity, in which they had to use and discover a range of different resources, it fostered a
student directed learning environment. Rashid and Asghar (2016) Explain that the use of
technology not only provides students with the opportunity to be self-directed in their learning
but it also increases their ability to filter information and use it in an appropriate context to the
task at hand. Introducing technology into this activity was also used as means to meet the cross
curricular outcome of ‘Asia and its diversity’, comparing the Philippines and China.

Gore (2007) expresses the importance of an explicit quality criteria in promoting student learning.
The original lesson lacked explicit quality criteria and in turn there were no expectations given to
the class about the quality of work that was expected. For instance, starting the lesson by
directing students to rip a page out of their book to complete the activity that would later be used
for formative assessment, automatically sets a pretence that the quality and presentation of work
is not of a high value to the teacher. Thus this was changed to a mind map facilitated by teacher.
To increase student engagement and explicit quality criteria, students were also instructed that
they were to create a power point presentation that would be later viewed by the class and
utilised later in the term to assist them with upcoming assignments. Gore (2007) explains that by
explaining a purpose for the work and having them held accountable, assists students in

7
improving the level of work that they are producing and increases student willingness to
participate.

The third change to the lesson plan was to increase connectedness. In the original lesson plan not
much was done to connect what students were learning to anything beyond the classroom (Gore
2007). On the surface of the lesson it seemed that connectedness may have been attempted
through the use of the visual aids and the reflective discussion, however these links were
weakened as students could not see the context behind the pictures. Therefore, making it seem
less authentic and harder to relate to, by giving students access to the internet and programs such
as google earth, they were able to connect to the topic beyond the classroom (Gore 2007). Gore
(2007) also explains that if students perceive different reasons to engage in the work, other than
the simple fact that they are at school, that it is likely to strengthen connectedness and
engagement. Thus, students were told that their power point presentation would be presented to
the class at the end of the activity and later used for reflection.

The final change to the lesson plan was to ensure that social support was highlighted as important
aspect of the lesson. Strong social support in the classroom has been linked to not only increase
academic performance, but also increased self-efficacy, motivation, empathy towards class mates
and improved conflict resolution skills (Dwyer. Et al. 2009). Students who have a fear of being
ridiculed by their teacher or peers are more likely to withdraw from classroom activities and be
disengaged (Gore 2007). To foster a supportive inclusive environment, the teacher will ensure
that groups are composed of students with mixed abilities and tasks will also be somewhat
delegated to reflect students’ strengths. This choice was made in attempt to highlight each
students’ strengths and abilities in the group while giving other students the chance to learn
directly off their peers. It was hoped that giving students a task that they were somewhat
comfortable with, whilst still challenging them with new information, at the start of the new topic.
That it would assist in boosting their confidence for the rest of the unit “places and liveability”.

8
References

ACARA - Cross-curriculum priorities. (2018). Retrieved from:

https://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum/cross-curriculum-priorities

Dwyer, K., Bingham, S., Carlson, R., Prisbell, M., Cruz, A., & Fus, D. (2004).
Communication and connectedness in the classroom: Development of the connected
classroom climate inventory. Communication Research Reports, 21(3), 264-272.

Gore. J. (2007). Improving pedagogy: the challenges of moving teachers toward higher
levels of quality teaching. Making a difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching,
and teacher education. pp 15-33. Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Sense Publishers.

Marzano, R. (2010). High Expectations for All. Educational Leadership, 68(1),

82-84.

Rashid, T. & Asghar, H. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student

engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in
Human Behavior, 63, 604-612.

Trimmel, M., Bachmann, J. (2004). Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of
students in laptop classrooms. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20 pp. 151-
158, 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00076.x