Example Lesson Plan Analysis
This checklist resource will help you to analyze and adapt existing materials using multiliteracies principles. The purpose is to identify aspects of text-based lessons that are in line with these principles, and aspects where changes are needed. Each part of the checklist asks you to analyze the lesson using multiliteracies principles.
The interpretive reading lesson included in this example is found at the end of a chapter addressing the topic of things to do in the city. This is the third chapter of an introductory textbook intended for postsecondary learners, and is thus part of a first-semester French curriculum. In this example, the lesson is considered within the learning objectives, language forms, and cultural content for the chapter as a whole.
Key terms marked with an * are defined in the Literacies Glossary.
PART I: Contextualize Your Lesson
The information below provides a context for the interpretive reading lesson based on the textbook chapter in which it occurs.
PART II: Analyze Your Lesson
In this section you will analyze the activities from the textbook lesson using the information from Part I and your understanding of the Knowledge Processes* of multiliteracies pedagogy. First read through the textbook lesson, then formulate answers to the questions in the table. Next click on the other tab to compare your analysis against that of the Literacies in Language Education project leaders.
- ACTIVITY 1: Instructor leads whole-class brainstorming to elicit students’ previous knowledge about Montreal (e.g., location, size, languages spoken, landmarks, etc.).
- ACTIVITY 2: Students read the blog and comments and answer multiple choice questions about place names (i.e., Montreal neighborhoods and suburbs) in the text.
- ACTIVITY 3: Instructor leads whole-class discussion on positive and negative points of the city in which they live. Instructor provides topic categories to guide the discussion (e.g., safety, cultural activities, diversity, transportation, etc.).
Context Analysis
Enter the number of the corresponding learning objective(s), language form(s), and cultural content (see Part I) that are the specific focus of each activity. If no learning objectives, language forms, or cultural content are targeted by an activity, leave that box blank.
Your Response
Project Leader Response
Knowledge Processes Analysis
Indicate which knowledge process each activity corresponds to by checking the appropriate box in the table. Note that some activities may correspond to more than one knowledge process.
Your Response
Project Leader Response
PART III: Evaluate Your Lesson
Refer to your analysis to help you answer the questions below. Formulate your answer to each question and then compare it to the Suggested Response from the Literacies in Language Education project leaders.
Question 1
Consider your answer to this question: Does the lesson align with your chapter/unit learning objectives? Which objectives are not met? Is it important to address these in your revised lesson?
When ready, click to reveal the suggested response.
Suggested Response
The lesson targets the learning objective of talking about things to do in the city and, to a lesser extent, asking or saying where a place is located. Most of the objectives for this chapter are language oriented, and although they are important for developing students’ accuracy and facility with the chapter’s targeted forms, none of these objectives encourage interpretation or critical thinking about the chapter’s cultural content or about the blog post students read. In addition to incorporating more of the chapter’s learning objectives, the revised lesson should include some additional objectives that address these gaps.
Question 2
Consider your answer to this question: Does the lesson sufficiently target your chapter/unit language forms or cultural content? What chapter/unit language forms and cultural content are present in your authentic text(s)? How can you address these in your revised lesson?
When ready, click to reveal the suggested response.
Suggested Response
The lesson mostly focuses on vocabulary development through brainstorming activities and surface-level comprehension of textual facts related to vocabulary and place names. The lesson would benefit from including other of the chapter’s language forms that allow students to question the text or relate information from the text to their own activities and experiences. None of the lesson’s activities target cultural understanding, so none of the chapter’s cultural content is present in the lesson. The text itself has a number of language forms and cultural features that could be addressed in a revised lesson, including city, transit, entertainment, and shopping vocabulary; organizational features of a blog entry; cultural information about Montreal; and insider/outsider views of the city.
Question 3
Consider your answer to this question: Does the lesson include all four Knowledge Processes? Which are absent from the lesson? How can you incorporate missing knowledge processes to ensure that students work with authentic text(s) to express their thoughts and opinions, understand how language forms are used to express ideas, interpret the importance and consequences of ideas, and use language and new knowledge in creative ways?
When ready, click to reveal the suggested response.
Suggested Response
The lesson only targets the Knowledge Process of experiencing, and students only gain basic understanding of some of the facts in the text. They do not interpret information, use language creatively, or understand how language forms are used in the text to express ideas. To encourage all of these types of learning, the activities in the lesson should more deliberately build on one another; there should be more while-reading activities that help students understand how opinions about Montreal are expressed in the text (i.e., conceptualizing*) and encourage cultural comparison (i.e., analyzing*); and the post-reading activity should require more creative language production that incorporates ideas gleaned from the text (i.e., Does this activity engage students in applying*?).
Question 4
Consider your answer to this question: Which activities from the original lesson must be adapted or eliminated to address any gaps you identified in #1-3? What new activities do you need to create to help feel these gaps?
When ready, click to reveal the suggested response.
Suggested Response
The brainstorming (Activity 1) that starts the lesson can remain, but should serve as a source of linguistic support for other activities that are added to the lesson. This lesson could be adapted so that students brainstorm words related to categories of chapter vocabulary (city, shopping, entertainment, transportation) that they think might appear in the text. After gaining initial understanding of the text, students could then identify words from the brainstorming activity that are in the text and add more words from the text to their list. (See Revised Lesson, Activities 1-3)
The multiple choice reading activity (Activity 2) can be a starting point for ensuring that students have general comprehension of text facts and can provide scaffolding more interpretive activities. Subsequent activities could include classifying comments on the blog post based on whether they present positive or negative views of Montreal, and then comparing these to opinions people might have about their own city. (See Revised Lesson, Activities 4-6)
The post-reading activity in which students describe their own city (Activity 3) isn’t clearly tied to the rest of the lesson. It should either be modified to connect more closely with what students do in the activities that precede it or should be eliminated in favor of a different activity. An alternative would be for students to write a blog post about their own city and then solicit comments from residents and non-residents. (See Revised Lesson, Activities 7-8)