Lesson Reflection

5.3 On the GroundBut Still Out of Reach

Lauren Martin

A few weeks ago, I taught my very first lesson. My very first

lesson may have been a seventh grade lesson taught to a college level

class but it was an experience to reflect on and learn from. The lesson I

co-taught was 5.3 On the Ground, But Still Out of Reach. The lesson

was about using similar nested triangles to estimate large distances or

out of reach measures.

Our goals of the lesson were for students to understand and

know the definition of nested triangles, the characteristics that make

nested triangles similar, and to be able to identify corresponding parts.

We also wanted students to be able to broaden their knowledge of

nested triangles and finding missing sides to a more real world

example where they estimate distances that are immeasurable.

We were able to accomplish some of our learning goals in the

lesson, while others were not accomplished. An example of when we

did accomplish a goal was at 1:03 in our video, when Eric mentioned

that the corresponding sides have the same ratio, which is what we

stated in our lesson plan template as to what exactly we wanted the

students to say in response to our questions.

At about 8:48 in the second video was another example of an

accomplished learning goal when the student replied to our question

the width of the trees across the river.

One thing I noticed about myself as the teacher and having my

students accomplish the learning goals is that during the lesson, when

some of these goals were met and I knew that they were met, I could

kind of tell that I got excited and my enthusiasm as a teacher

increased a little bit. This made me realize that I should have more

consistency in my enthusiasm and that I should increase it more than

what I was showing throughout this lesson because enthusiasm about

your materials are key to engaging the students. I think this would

have better helped my students engage in the lesson that we were

teaching.

Our intended lesson compared to our enacted lesson was pretty

similar. The only real difference between the two was a lot of the

content that we wanted to discuss and assess through questions got

lost in the shuffle of enacting the lesson. There was more instruction

and explanation of the activity in the enacted lesson compared to the

intended lesson. There was also less question asking by us in the

enacted lesson than planned, which in turn cut out a lot of how we had

intended to assess the students on the content.

An example of where our enacted lesson differed from the

intended lesson was at the 1:00 minute mark through all the slide

examples that we had because we switched up the slides with the

learned that even the best of color-coding and organization of a script

could be mixed up and put in the wrong place.

We also diverged from the intended lesson plan when we

reached the outside activity because we had realized that more

instruction on what to do was needed and therefore the assessment

questions kind of got thrown away and not used, at least on my end

anyway. Ms. Greenwood may have still asked the groups her intended

questions during the float time among groups, but I could not tell from

the video.

There are a few things that I would have done differently, but

there are two that I really wish I had thought of before hand. I would

have found a better way to make the beginning review more

interesting and engaging because that was the engage part of our

lesson and it did not do its job like it was supposed to. I also would

have changed how we gave instruction to our students. I feel that we

kind of left our students dazed and confused on what to do when we

arrived at the river area.

I think a way that we could have made the beginning review a

little more interesting would have been to relate it to real world

examples and make the problems a little less computational than they

were. In previous lessons, students found missing sides in a

computational way and spent a lot of time on that topic, so I think a

factor. It would have been something different compared to the same

routine problems the students were already doing. I think while

planning this part of the lesson, we were so focused on not giving away

exactly how to do the river problem before we got outside to do the

activity that we made our problems at the beginning very cut and dry.

We could have instead focused on other problems that were similar

and were real life examples.

I also was not happy with myself on how confused everyone was

on how to do the activity. I should have explained the concept of

finding the distance across the river more before going outside, it

would have helped the students better gage what measurements they

needed to take outside. Also, typing out instructions would have

helped the students remember what they were supposed to do once

we arrived outside to do the activity.

The feedback that I found most helpful was about how things

could have been done differently. One of my peers said that directions

on a handout for the students when they went outside would have

helped with the confusion. I think this would have been a great idea

and allowed us teachers to have more discussion with students about

the content of the activity as well as asking more assessment

questions.
 Also, another peer said that collaboration of students answers at

the table during the review activity at the beginning could have made

better use of the time rather than shouting out the answers to the

class after everyone had discussed them. I think even calling on one

group and then asking the rest of the class whether or not they agree

with so and so would be a better way to promote discussion and a

better use of the time.

Another student also mentioned the size of the groups and how

smaller groups could have been more beneficial and more engaging to

all students and not allowing for some students to hang off to the side

while only a couple of the students in the group do the work. Looking

back at the larger groups, I realize that even splitting off one more

group to make four total groups would have helped with the

engagement of all students. I also think that having everyone fill out

their own worksheet that went along with the activity would have been

more beneficial for all students especially if larger groups were the only

option.

I learned a lot from reading the student and teacher materials. I

had never read or looked at a teachers manual before this class, so I

think that definitely opened a door to what my dream job truly entails.

I also learned that looking at the student materials along with the

teacher materials sincerely helped because it was easier to gage the

at.

Overall, this was a unique experience, which brought forth a lot

of things to think about when planning and teaching a lesson. The

feedback from everyone in the class also really helped in seeing the

students perspective of our lesson as well as a fellow teachers

perspective and pointing out opportunities for improvement and

alternate ideas.