The document discusses different approaches to lesson planning, including traditional behaviorist and constructivist frameworks. It introduces a perceptual framework called "lesson sketches" developed by Uhrmacher, Conrad, and Moroye. Lesson sketches focus on six dimensions: connections, risk-taking, imagination, sensory experience, perceptivity, and active engagement. This approach aims to make lesson planning more open-ended and avoid reducing students to labels or preconceived outcomes. The document argues this approach can foster richer learning experiences for both teachers and students.
The document discusses different approaches to lesson planning, including traditional behaviorist and constructivist frameworks. It introduces a perceptual framework called "lesson sketches" developed by Uhrmacher, Conrad, and Moroye. Lesson sketches focus on six dimensions: connections, risk-taking, imagination, sensory experience, perceptivity, and active engagement. This approach aims to make lesson planning more open-ended and avoid reducing students to labels or preconceived outcomes. The document argues this approach can foster richer learning experiences for both teachers and students.
The document discusses different approaches to lesson planning, including traditional behaviorist and constructivist frameworks. It introduces a perceptual framework called "lesson sketches" developed by Uhrmacher, Conrad, and Moroye. Lesson sketches focus on six dimensions: connections, risk-taking, imagination, sensory experience, perceptivity, and active engagement. This approach aims to make lesson planning more open-ended and avoid reducing students to labels or preconceived outcomes. The document argues this approach can foster richer learning experiences for both teachers and students.
The document discusses different approaches to lesson planning, including traditional behaviorist and constructivist frameworks. It introduces a perceptual framework called "lesson sketches" developed by Uhrmacher, Conrad, and Moroye. Lesson sketches focus on six dimensions: connections, risk-taking, imagination, sensory experience, perceptivity, and active engagement. This approach aims to make lesson planning more open-ended and avoid reducing students to labels or preconceived outcomes. The document argues this approach can foster richer learning experiences for both teachers and students.
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 30
Lesson Sketches
Dr. Dan Conn
Minot State University daniel.conn@minotstateu.edu Lesson Planning
Schools and teacher education programs worldwide require
lesson plans from teachers, a practice many often view as trivial, mundane, or bureaucratic (Crispin, 1991; Glatthorn, 1993). Rarely do public school teachers think of writing lesson plans as something that pushes their creativity or their ability to create meaning for themselves out of the content they are teaching; lesson planning is seen as a necessity, not as a meaningful act (Crispin, 1991; Glatthorn, 1993; Bulkley & Hicks, 2005). Traditional Lesson Plans
Traditionally, curriculum courses focus teachers on
lesson planning using two contrasting theoretical frameworks: Behaviorist Constructivist. Behaviorist
The behaviorist framework asks teachers to begin with
objectives and/or standards in mind before designing a lesson that will generally seen to be successful based on observable changes in student behavior aligned with the specified objectives (Tyler, 1949; Hunter, 1983). Constructivist
The constructivist framework asks that teachers begin
with learners in mind, and represents students as actively engaged in constructing their own knowledge by making meaning out of those situations with support from the teacher. Constructivist lesson planning may still align with les- be successful based on both objectives measures and reflection on individual growth (Duckworth, 2006; Schmuck & Schmuck, 1988; Schon, 1987; Wiggins & McTighe 2005). Could there be another way?
Generally missing from both the behaviorist and
constructivist orientations, however, is concern for the teachers process of actually creating the lesson; instead, the focus is the lesson plan as product. In particular, the process of lesson planning pays little attention to ideas such as capturing teacher creativity, meaning-making, and invigoration. A Perceptual Framework Noticing Subtleties
Imagination is more important than knowledge
Imagination is more important than knowledge
Imagination is more important than knowledge
Just a Beagle? The Lesson Sketch
Uhrmacher, Conrad, and Moroye (2013) developed a
perceptual framework for lesson planning, known as lesson sketches. Lesson sketches consist of six dimensions: connections, risk-taking, imagination, sensory experience, perceptivity, and active engagement. Connections
Connections are the ways in which an
individual interacts with an idea or object in the learning environment. These connections may be intellectual, emotional, sensorial, or communicative. Risk Taking
Risk taking refers to students
opportunities to try something new, to step out of their normal realm of experience. Risks are different for different students. Imagination
Imagination refers to the manipulation of ideas,
which may be characterized in several ways. Imagination may be intuitive, in which a person has a sudden rush of insight; fanciful, in which a person combines unexpected elements such as a talking clock; and interactive, in which a person works with materials to yield a product. Sensory Experience
Sensory experience includes at least one
person and a sensory interaction with an object. We use the term object metaphorically. It may of course refer to an actual object such as a vase or a painting, but also it can refer to a text, a soundscape, a landscape, an image, or simply something focused upon such as birds flying over a barn. Perceptivity
Perceptivity describes a deepened sensory experience.
Perception is an achievement and as such can be developed. As an example, we could look at almost any object and notice its surface features, but when we really look and examine it, we begin to notice its subtle qualities. Active Engagement
Active engagement requires students to be in the
drivers seat. They should be at the helm of their own learning. This could include making sure they are physically active, or intellectually creating meaning, or making choices about how to represent their knowledge. The Lesson Sketch Template Lesson Sketch with CRISPA
What do I need in order to set my students up for success?
Am I taking any risks as a teacher?
Modeling How will I show my students what I am expecting? How will we create a safe environment for learning?
Body of the Lesson
How will we orchestrate our time together?
Reflection What went well? What will I change? How might I use the dimensions differently? Implications
Richer Experiences = Strengthened Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1978) Implications
Without addressing the exact objectives and assessment
outcomes, the lesson sketch design (Uhrmacher, Conrad, & Moroye, 2013) does not specify a preconceived description of what all students should be expected to do before or after the lesson. Rather, the lesson sketch focuses on intentions as the guiding force of the lesson. Using broader strokes (p. 5) to describe the goals of a lesson, the sketch design aims to account for the process, or experiences, of learning along with the learning product (Uhrmacher, Conrad, & Moroye, 2013). A way to avoid what Freire (1970) calls the Banking System, where:
THE BANKING SYSTEM
the teacher teaches and the students are taught; the teacher knows everything and the students know nothing; the teacher thinks and the students are thought about; the teacher talks and the students listen -- meekly; the teacher disciplines and the students are disciplined; the teacher chooses and enforces his choice, and the students comply; the teacher acts and the students have the illusion of acting through the action of the teacher; the teacher chooses the program content, and the students (who were not consulted) adapt to it; the teacher confuses the authority of knowledge with his or her own professional authority, which she and he sets in opposition to the freedom of the students; the teacher is the Subject of the learning process, while the pupils are mere objects. The Colonizing Effects of Labels (Conn, 2013; Conn, 2015) Further Implications reduction of labels
Self-fulfilling Nature of Labels (Tannenbaum, 1938; Lemert, 1951; Becker,
1963; & Goffman, 1963)
Labels can predispose outsiders to distort observations of behaviors that
contradict the label so as to stay within its frame (Sue et al, 2006).
A simple word, like unsatisfactory or advanced, can become a label.
The power embedded in words is especially worrisome for children who have been conditioned to trust adults (Hunt, 2010).
Labeling students based on objectives and assessments typecast them into
a category they may not have otherwise selected for themselves. What does this mean for Literacy: Efferent vs. Aesthetic (Rosenblatt, L. M. (1994). Advantages
Behaviorist modeling teacher centered focuses on specific outcomes Constructivist differentiation student centered scaffolding to help students get to specific outcomes Perceptual fosters teacher and students creativity centered around both teacher and student, depending on intentions open to different outcomes Resources
http://www.crispateaching.org
daniel.conn@minotstateu.edu References
Barone, T. "Educational Connoisseurship." Encyclopedia
of Curriculum Studies. Ed. Craig Kridel, 1, 313-314. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Reference. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders. New York: Free Press. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as Experience. Chicago: Penguin. Eisner, E. W. (2002). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of educational programs (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan. References
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of
spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall. Hunt, J. (2010). Learning disability: A rose by another name. The Natural Child Project. Retrieved November 17, 2010, from http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/learning.html Kim K. T. (2010). 'Panoptic' accountability: Supervisory leaders and normalizing or resisting professionals. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 7(1), n/a. References
Lemert, E. M. (1951). Social pathology. New York:
McGraw-Hill. Locke, T., & Riley, D. (2009)What happened to educational criticism? Engaging with a paradigm for observation.Educational Action Research, 17(4), 489-504. Marland, M. (1986). Appraisal and evaluation: Chimera, fantasy, or practicality? Educational Management Administration & Leadership,14(3), 169-189. References
O'Donoghue, D. (2009). Are we asking the wrong questions in arts-
based research? Studies in Art Education, 50(4), 352-368.
Palmer, J. A. (1992). Connoisseurship and creativity: Monitoring
creative thinking abilities in primary school children in England. The Journal of Environmental Education, 23(3), 17-27.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1994). The transactional theory of reading and
writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Southcott, J. (2004). Seeing the big picture: Experiential education in
tertiary music education. The Journal of Experiential Education, 27(1), 1- 14. References
Tannenbaum, F. (1938). Crime and community. New York:
Columbia University Press. Uhrmacher, P. B., Conrad, B. M., & Moroye, C. M. (2013). Finding the balance process product through perceptual lesson planning. Teachers College Record, 115(070303), 1-27. Ua-Anant, M. S. (1987). A system for analyzing and evaluating thai art curriculum content. Journal of Multi - Cultural and Cross - Cultural Research in Art Education, 5(1), 144-158. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), 34-41.
Analyse Theories, Principles and Models of Learning. Explain Ways in Which The Theories, Principles and Models of Learning Can Be Applied To Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
Analyse Theories, Principles and Models of Learning. Explain Ways in Which The Theories, Principles and Models of Learning Can Be Applied To Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
