Anthony Lucre

17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 1

Lesson Plan Analysed: Science_LP.docx

102086 Designing Teaching & Learning

Assignment 2: QT Analysis Template

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: The central ideas of freezing as a physical process is addressed in terms of what
the students already know as part of the introduction. The addressing of this and other topics
such as suppression of the freezing point of water by dissolved solutes is sporadically
covered at best throughout the remainder of the lesson.
1.2 Deep understanding
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Deep understanding is difficult to assess from a lesson plan as it measures the
understanding of actual students in the classroom context. In this case students have the
opportunity to demonstrate their understanding during the introduction, the construction of
models and potentially during the final discussion of the lesson.
1.3 Problematic knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: knowledge in this lesson plan is presented as fact. While students are given the
opportunity to express knowledge the focus of section such as the end of lesson discussion is
to present the knowledge to students and correct misconceptions they may have. There is no
evidence of knowledge being socially constructed or open to multiple interpretations or
understandings.
1.4 Higher-order thinking
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: For most of the lesson students are required to either reproduce prior knowledge
or follow instructions given by the teacher. Only at one point are students asked to exhibit
higher order thinking. This is when they are asked to use the models to predict what is
happening to the samples at the atomic level to explain the reduction in freezing point for
water containing dissolved solutes
1.5 Metalanguage
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: The lesson plan displays very limited use of metalanguage. The use of
metalanguage in this lesson is restricted to the 5 minute brainstorming activity at the start of
the lesson when students are asked to define the word freeze. At a later point students are
simply provided with definitions for sodium, chloride and other chemicals however this does
not constitute a high level use of metalanguage.
1.6 Substantive communication
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Substantive communication is difficult to assess from a lesson plan as it
involves the observation of actual students in class. In this case I have based the assessment
on the potential for substantive communication to occur. In this lesson there is the potential
for substantive communication between students during the modelling exercise as they
attempt to explain the reduction in the freezing point of water using models.
Quality learning environment
2.1 Explicit quality criteria
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: explicit learning criteria describe the expected standards to which work is to be
completed. In this lesson while students are provided with instructions for carrying out work
there is no explicit quality criteria given.
2.2 Engagement
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: class engagement is difficult to assess from a lesson plan as it requires
observation of classroom behaviour. In this case the lesson plan has activities such as the
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 2

experiment comparing freezing points of water and the modelling exercise which could be
expected to have a reasonable level of engagement by most students however this would
also vary from one class to another.
2.3 High expectations
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students are provided with limited opportunities to take risks and be recognised
for challenging work. At no point is a specific student required to contribute to class
discussions and as such it can be expected that only the most confident students will do so.
As we cannot observe the lesson taking place it is impossible to judge the level of
recognition and reward that students receive for risk taking.
2.4 Social support
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Social support is difficult to judge from a lesson plan as it involves the
interactions between students as well as the teacher. It describes the environment created
such that students are willing to risk contributing with fear of negative consequences. There
is nothing in the lesson plan to suggest the expected level of social support that will take
place in this lesson so a rating cannot be given
2.5 Students’ self-regulation
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Student’s Self-regulation describes the ability of students to control their own
behaviour such that the lesson can progress with little or no time for discipline or explicit
classroom management. In this case as only a lesson plan is provided we cannot judge the
actual level of self-regulation displayed by students. The lesson plan however does provide
two activities where students are expected to operate in small groups. These are the
experiment and the modelling activity. The inclusion of these activities suggests that the
teacher anticipates that most students would be able to act autonomously with limited
supervision during this time.
2.6 Student direction
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: in this lesson plan students are provided with little opportunity for self-direction
either as individuals or a class group. All activities are pre-determined by the teacher with
limited input from students.
3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Students background knowledge is raised only once during the introduction
brainstorming activity. This activity describes the concept of freezing but does not explore
the main topic of the lesson, specifically the depression of the freezing point of water by
dissolved solutes.
3.2 Cultural knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: no specific reference is made to cultural understanding other than that of the
dominant group. No cultural link is made regarding the content or activities in the lesson
plan
3.3 Knowledge integration
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Knowledge covered in this lesson is largely restricted to the science subject
material. The optional video at the end does link to the use of salt as a means of melting ice
by lowering the freezing point however all other activities exhibit limited connection to
other learnings. The activities in the lesson plan while related do not necessarily build on
each other to create an integrated learning strategy
3.4 Inclusivity
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: the inclusivity of the classroom environment cannot be judged from a lesson
plan as it requires the observation of actual students. The lesson plan does not display any
activities that would suggest the marginalisation of any students or the need for any student
to exclude themselves from classroom activities.
3.5 Connectedness
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: The lesson focuses on the processes of freezing of water and the depression of
the freezing point of water. This content is largely taught without any connection to anything
beyond itself. The exception to this is the optional video at the end of the lesson which
demonstrates one use for this concept beyond the classroom. The other possible exception is
during the brainstorming activity at the start of the lesson however this will depend on the
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 3

background knowledge of the students.

3.6 Narrative
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: The use of narrative in this lesson plan is limited to the optional video
describing the use of salt to reduce the freezing point of water for road safety. As this is a
short section of the lesson plan and is considered optional a low score for this criteria is
justified.

Identifying Areas for Improvement

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

QT model
1) 1.4 Higher-order thinking 2) 1.6 Substantive communication
3) 3.5 Connectedness 4) 3.6 Narrative
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 4

Lesson Plan

Topic area: Stage of Learner: Stage 4 Syllabus Pages:

Temperature, Freezing points and
Chemical reactions.
Date: Location Booked: Lesson Number: /

Time: Total Number of students Printing/preparation

Materials for students: 100mm clear
plastic test tubes, test tube lid or cork,
test tube rack, water at 10oC, salt,
sugar, periodic table, freezer,
teaspoon., marker, timer, foam
spheres of different sizes and colours
to represent the elements: Na, Cl and
H O and C. Small wooden sticks to
represent connections for the
elements and compound.

Ipads or other internet connected

devices,

Additional Materials: Freezer,

monitor in front of classroom, access
to the internet, large bottles of water
at 100C, correct chemical and
physical equations for both salt water
and sugar water. Thermometers, data
logger with temperature probe, time
lapse camera

Outcomes Assessment Students learn about Students learn to

A student: describes the observed The students will: SC4-4WS: collaboratively
properties and behavior of matter,  Explain how and individually produces a
using scientific models and theories dissolving salt plan to investigate questions
about the motion and arrangement of and sugar into and problems
particles SC4-16CW water will affect
the freezing point SC4-6WS b. assembling and
relate changes in the physical depression of using appropriate equipment
properties of matter to heat energy and resources to perform the
water.
and particle movement that occur
 Predict the investigation, including
during observations of evaporation,
freezing points of safety equipment
condensation, boiling, melting and
freezing SC4-CW1-d the water
solutions SC4-6WS c. selecting
containing either equipment to collect data
salt or sugar and with accuracy appropriate to
which will freeze the task
first.
 Demonstrate the
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 5

ability to record
and analysis the
data collected
from the
experiment as
they engage in
critically thinking
about the topic.

Time Teaching and learning actions

5 min
Start the classroom with a brain storm to draw out students current understanding and knowledge of
freezing points and common chemical reactions.

Ask the question “Ok class what come to mind when you think about the word freeze?

Write the word freeze on the board with a circle around it.

Ask how is relates to the topic chemical world. remove

Guide their thoughts to the lessons focus without influencing there the responses.

By asking:
How does something freeze?
Why it freezes?
What happens when something freezes?

20 Practical activity
min Explain that the aim of the lesson today is to examine the effect that dissolving salt or sugar in water has on
the freezing point of that water.
Have students begin the write up of their experiment by writing this aim in their books

Think – pair – share: student design the method for their experiment
In pairs instruct students to think of ways that they could test the given aim.
Encourage them to consider what control they will be testing against, what data they will need to collect to
test this aim and how it will be measured, safety concerns and risks.
After 5 minutes have two pairs combine and discuss and critique their respective ideas and agree on a
method for all of them to follow.

While this occurs the teacher visits each pair or group and uses probing questions to identify issues or make
suggestions.

After a further 2 minutes the teacher conducts a class discussion to establish a final method for the
experiment. All students copy this final method into their books.

Class discusses risks and mitigation strategies for carrying out this experiment.

It is expected that generally students will choose to test the freezing point of water, salt water and sugar
water by placing a known identical quantity of each in a freezer and measure the temperature using a
thermometer or data logger with temperature probe. Students may also choose to use a time lapse camera to
determine how long it takes for each sample to freeze.

Students set up the experiment using the method agreed to in the class discussion with teacher supervision
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 6

20 Using models to understand freezing

min
ICT simulation: understanding the process of freezing
have students access the phet simulation for states of matter
https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/states-of-matter-basics/latest/states-of-matter-basics_en.html

using the simulation have students explore the interaction of water molecules as they increase and decrease
the temperature to form solids, liquids and gases.

In particular have them describe the difference between water as a solid (particles joined to form a lattice)
and a liquid (particles moving freely over one another)

Introduce the boxes foam spheres scaled in size to represent the elements: Na (Sodium), Cl (Chloride),
C(Carbon), H (Hydrogen) and O (Oxygen) to each group.

Have the students use their tablets to research the structure of water H2O, salt (NaCl) and sugar and
construct models using the foam spheres and toothpicks.
Based on their research and the ICT simulation students build model of frozen water.

Ask students to use the other models they have created to try and predict why the freezing point of water is
depressed by the presence of dissolved solutes

15 Research task: How is freezing point depression used?

min
In the same groups as the earlier activities each pair researches ways in which the depression of the freezing
point of water is used in society. Two suggested starting points are the de-icing of roads and the use of
dissolved salts in some forms of antifreeze.

Once pairs have researched a use they present their findings to the other pair in their group.

If there is time the teacher can select some groups to present to the rest of the class

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 7

When examining the provided science lesson plan for this assignment against the NSW quality
teaching model low to medium scores were evident in most criteria. In order to improve this lesson I
have chosen to focus on the following four criteria: 1.4 Higher-Order thinking, 1.6 Substantive
Communication, 3.5 Connectedness and 3.6 Narrative.

Before directly addressing each of these four criteria the first modifications made to the supplied
lesson plan related to the instructional alignment both between the lesson plan and the syllabus and
between the stated objectives for the lesson plan and the activities undertaken. While Instructional
alignment as a direct measurement of teaching quality has not been strongly established (Morgan S.
Polikoff, Andrew C. Porter, 2014) it has been shown to have a significant role in improving student
learning outcomes and ensuring consistency across standardised testing (Petersen, Susan Cruz, Luz,
2004). The lesson planned as supplied is stated to be for a stage 4 science class however the syllabus
outcome chosen is SC5-CW4 from the NSW stage 5 science syllabus ( NSW Education Standards
Authority, 2012). Further to this the syllabus outcome is intended to describe different types of
chemical reactions while the lesson plan as provided deals with changes in the state of matter of
water from liquid to solid (freezing) which is described as a physical rather than chemical change. To
better match the content of the lesson I have changed the outcome to SC4-16CW and SC4-CW1-d
which relate both to the movement of particles and changes of state. Similarly other outcomes in
the students learn to and students learn about have been changed to better reflect the revised
lesson plan.

The first area of the NSW quality teaching model that I will address is higher order thinking. The
model defines higher order thinking as a process in which students manipulate information and
ideas to solve problems or create new meanings from the knowledge they already possess (NSW
department of Education and Training, 2008). In the presented lesson higher order thinking was
required for only a single activity. This involved the students constructing models of water, sugar,
sodium and chloride molecules and using them to attempt to understand why dissolving sugar or
salt depresses the freezing point of water. This attempt at inquiry based learning however requires
students to also understand the concept of the freezing of water at the atomic and molecular scale
which is not covered in the lesson. The requirement for students to construct such a large body of
knowledge with minimal guidance is likely to result in a high cognitive load (Paul A. Kirschner , John
Sweller & Richard E. Clark, 2006) and reduced capacity to complete the task (Sweller, 2012). In order
to reduce the required cognitive load on students I have revised the lesson activity to include the
following features. Before undertaking the modelling activity students now utilise a computer
simulation visualising the interaction of water molecules in relation to the amount of heat energy in
the system. This allows the students to understand the process of freezing prior to the model making
activity. Further to this rather than simply using spheres to represent each of the molecules student
will now create scale models of each molecule allowing them to see the relative size of each
molecule and so understand how they may interact at the molecular level. These modifications are
intended to scaffold the concept of freezing at the molecular scale and the relative size of the
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 8

molecules involved so that students can more easily understand their interaction in reducing the
freezing point of water. (Mehwish Haider and Aalyia Yasmin, 2015).

The second NSW quality teaching criteria I will address is substantive communication. The NSW
Quality teaching model describes substantive communication as a sustained two directional
interaction concerning the substance of the lesson both between students and between students
and the teacher (NSW department of Education and Training, 2008). In the original lesson plan
opportunities for substantive communication were limited to conversation between students during
the group model making activity. While other interactions between the students and the teacher
exist they were generally non substantive and one way in nature. Substantive communication
particularly between students in small group exercises (Hattie, 2009) has been shown to improve
understanding and problem solving abilities through peer assistance or tutoring (Greenwood, C. and
Parket, R., 2013). In order to improve this aspect of quality teaching I have included additional
opportunities for students to work together in problem solving tasks. This includes students in pairs
working to design the experimental procedure for measuring the effect of dissolved solutes on the
freezing point of water. Each pair then combines with a second pair to further refine the
experimental design through contrast and debate. These larger groups then contribute to a class
discussion to determine final design for the experiment. During this process the teacher is able to
join each group to provide guidance or monitor student progress thus providing further opportunity
for substantive communication. Similarly a further opportunity for substantive communication exists
during the final research task as students in pairs research uses for freezing point depression.

The third NSW quality teaching criteria I will be addressing is connectedness. Connectedness is
described as the linking knowledge to student’s prior knowledge and experiences such that is has
value outside of the classroom environment (NSW department of Education and Training, 2008). The
lesson plan as originally presented taught the concept of freezing point depression in isolation with
very limited application beyond the classroom itself. The two exceptions to this were the
brainstorming activity at the start of the lesson and a video marked as an optional activity.
Constructivist learning depends on knowledge being built up on prior understandings by an active
process (Cakir, 2008). Knowledge is most easily constructed when it is links to students
understanding and experiences outside the classroom environment (Patrick Blessinger and John M.
Carfora, 2015). To assist students in understand the purpose for learning about freezing point
depression the lesson ends with a pair research task where students identify real world scenarios
where this concept is important and then present their findings to the other half of their group. To
assist students two example uses are provided however students are encouraged to find further
examples on their own.

The final quality teaching criteria to be address is narrative. Narrative is the process of telling,
listening to, reading, or writing stories (NSW department of Education and Training, 2008). The use
of narrative in a classroom environment has been shown to assist students to more easily integrate
concepts that they are taught with prior knowledge. Further to this knowledge gained through
narrative is more easily recalled as required making this a useful tool in education (Strube, 1994).
The original lesson plan had very limited use of narrative by either the teacher or students. The one
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 9

exception to this was the optional video on the use of salt for road safety. This quality teaching
criteria is addressed through the addition of a research task where students are required to identify
and explain real world uses for freezing point depression to other members of their group. It is
expected that students will be able to link these uses to their own experiences and in doing so will
have stories to share.

Through addressing the four listed criteria the quality of the lesson and consequently the quality of
student learning is increased.

References
NSW Education Standards Authority. (2012). Science K-10 Syllabus. Retrieved 03 12, 2018, from NSW
Education Standards Authority:
http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/sciencek10/downloads/sciencek10_s5.pdf

Cakir, M. (2008). Constructivist Approaches to Learning in Science and Their Implications for Science
Pedagogy: A Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education,
193-206.

Greenwood, C. and Parket, R. (2013). Academic benefits of peer tutoring: A meta-analytic review of
single-case research. School Psychology Review, 39-55.

Hattie, J. A. (2009). A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York:
Routledge.

Mehwish Haider and Aalyia Yasmin. (2015). Significance of Scaffolding and Peer Tutoring in the Light
of Vygotsky's Theory of Zone of Proximal Development. International Journal of Languages,
Literature and Linguistics, pp. 170-173.

Morgan S. Polikoff, Andrew C. Porter. (2014). Instructional Alignment as a Measure of Teaching

Quality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 399–416.

NSW department of Education and Training. (2008). Quality Teaching Framework. Retrieved 03 22,
2018, from Elements of Learning and Achievement:
http://www.theelements.education.nsw.gov.au/the-elements-manual/policy-reforms-and-
focus-areas/quality-teaching-framework

Patrick Blessinger and John M. Carfora. (2015). Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math (STEM) Programs : A Conceptual and Practical Resource for
Educators. In P. B. Carfora, Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Math (STEM) Programs : A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators (pp. 3-19).
Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
 Anthony Lucre
17124573
Designing Teaching and Learning
Assignment 2
Page 10

Paul A. Kirschner , John Sweller & Richard E. Clark. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction
Does Not Work: An Analysis on the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based,
Experiential , and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 75-86.

Petersen, Susan Cruz, Luz. (2004). WHAT DID WE LEARN TODAY? THE IMPORTANCE OF
INSTRUCTIONAL ALIGNMENT. Strategies, 33.

Strube, P. (1994). Narrative in the science curriculum. Research in Science Education, 313-321.

Sweller, J. (2012). Human Cognitive architecture: Why some instructional procedures work and
others do not. In Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (pp. 295-
325). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

URL of Learning Portfolio: https://alucre.weebly.com/