Melanie Kerr

19928920

Melodramatic Action Figures: Lesson Plan Analysis and Revision

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: Content knowledge is deep and focuses on central concepts of melodrama within the
four action figures.

1.2 Deep understanding

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: All students demonstrate an understanding of the concepts within melodrama through
group feedback given at the end of each performance.

1.3 Problematic knowledge

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Some knowledge is more open to the teacher’s perspective than students, which is
confusing to the students. The teacher could engage more with students’ perspectives.

1.4 Higher-order thinking

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Higher order thinking is only shown in the group activity where students create a scene
using the characters. An improvement could be student directed activities where the teacher gives
less direct instructions and more open-ended instructions.

1.5 Metalanguage
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: There is a lack of metalanguage throughout the lesson. Terminology around the topic is
loosely explained. To improve, the teacher and students could comment on different languages in a
dramatic format through language character building.

1.6 Substantive communication

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Substantive communication only occurs throughout the two main activities. To improve,
the lesson could have more student direction, aiding communication and understanding.

Quality learning environment

2.1 Explicit quality criteria
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Criteria are detailed throughout the lesson. Students have the opportunity to give
feedback to each other whilst the teacher provides overall feedback adhering to the criteria of the
lesson.

2.2 Engagement
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: Throughout the lesson most students seem engaged. The lesson requires students to be
constantly moving and ignites creativity.

2.3 High expectations

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Whilst most students seem to participate in challenging work throughout the lesson,
little risk taking within group work is encouraged by the teacher. To improve, providing activities
that are more student directed could add a higher risk taking in learning resulting in higher
expectations.

2.4 Social support

2

1–2–3–4–5 Comments: Important social support with students is shown in the lesson through providing
constructive feedback to each group and valuing all contributions from students and teacher.

2.5 Students’ self-regulation

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Within the lesson all students are seen to have autonomy and to be behaving with
respect to the teacher and peers. Students demonstrate their initiative when it comes to partner and
group work.

2.6 Student direction

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Student direction is poor, whilst it is given throughout peer and group work tasks it is
still directed from the teacher. An improvement could be to allow students to create their own tasks
in regards to the outcomes of the lesson, using their intellectual creativity within a drama setting.

3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: The lesson provided significance to background knowledge through linking to previous
lessons and knowledge. Links were commented on and reinforced throughout the lesson, with some
connection to out of school and previous knowledge.
3.2 Cultural knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: There was a lack of cultural knowledge throughout the lesson. An improvement could
be to talk about melodramatic characters in drama in regards to 3-4 different cultures.

3.3 Knowledge integration

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Minor connections are made, however, knowledge is mostly limited to the specific topic
of the lesson. An improvement could be relating melodramatic characters back to a lesson on
lighting or costuming.

3.4 Inclusivity
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: All students from all social groups are included in all activities throughout the lesson.
Individuals are encouraged to work with partners and in-group activities to ensure inclusion of all
members.
3.5 Connectedness
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 Comments: Within the lesson there is a limited attempt at connection between lesson content and the
outside world. The teacher could improve by making reference to melodramatic characters
comparing them to what is happening in news and media, which would also enhance cultural
knowledge within the lesson.

3.6 Narrative
1–2–3–4–5 Comments: Narrative is used throughout the lesson by discussing the characteristics of the
melodramatic characters. Providing a story enhances the significance between the context of the
characters and the lessons outcomes.

Identifying Areas for Improvement

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

QT model
1) Metalanguage 2) Cultural Knowledge
3) Problematic Knowledge 4) Student Direction

Lesson Plan – Melodramatic Action Figures

Syllabus: Drama Stage: Stage 4 Topic: Making Drama

Outcomes Assessment Students learn about Students learn to

4.1.1 A student identifies
and explores the
elements of drama to
develop beliefs and clarity
in character, role,
situation and action.
Informal formative The processes of Develop fundamental
assessment. developing and sustaining vocal and physicalisation
a role/character through techniques appropriate to
voice, stance, gesture conveying role/character.
and status.
Explore basic movement
Ways in which techniques in relation to
movements assist roles/characters.
character development.

Note: Not all activities may be captured by the video. Assume the teacher covered them.

Time Teaching and Learning Actions

5 3-4min Lesson Preliminaries/Administration
• Learning space needs to be free from tables/chairs (push to sides if needed).
• Settle students into the classroom; ask them to sit in a circle on the floor.
• Mark the roll.

5 5-6 Direct Instruction

mins • Welcome students and remind them of the topic (melodrama). Ask students what they
can remember from the previous lesson.
• Remind students With a partner students discuss the about the four stock heroes in
melodrama: Hero, Villain, Sidekick and the Damsel (these are the ‘action figures’). After
group discussion, ask students to move into groups and identify 3 points of difference in
language and/or appearance between each character.
• Focus of today’s lesson is movement in melodrama,walking and posing. Explain with
examples that this adds another layer to the language of each character that students
just spoke about in their groups.

15 30 Movement Techniques/ Practice and Improvisation

mins • Teacher to demonstrate to students the movement In 4 groups, students choose an
envelope with a character written on it. Students are to research the main characteristics
of that character and to put them into 1-3 movements. Students write down any phrases
or images associated with the character.
• Get students to spread out and to mimic the teacher’s movements and vocalisations.
Students to connect with another group and to teach each other’s movement/s, talking
about the language that could be associated with the movement to the other group and
then switch.
• Teacher and class to discuss the cultural traditions, beliefs and skills in melodramatic
characters in Asian culture and other cultures. Images of Asian melodramatic characters
are displayed. Students connect and discuss the differences and similarities between
them.

4

10 5 Movement Improvisation/Practice
mins • Students will now improvise a movement/vocalisation in character.
• Students to pick a partner and decide who is A and B.
• Student A is to be a toymaker. Student B is a lump of plastic. Assign a different stock
hero to the Student Bs.
• When the teacher says go, the toymaker will create an action figure by moulding the lump
of plastic into a position that they’ve just learnt for the allocated melodrama stock hero.
• Repeat the previous step to create another pose.

5 mins Performance Preparation

• In two groups students are to take the role of a stock hero in a performance. There will be
four students in each performance. They need to devise one word/sentence and gesture
to accompany the role they are playing. Both western and Asian melodramatic
characteristics are to be used. Give an example using the hero.
• Students also need to work out the order each stock hero will perform their
sentence/gesture.

15 10 Performances
mins • Ask students to sit in rows towards the back of the room, so that the front can become a
stage/performance area.
• Each group has 1 minutes to perform to the class.
• After each performance, teacher asks students in the audience for constructive
comments about possible improvements to character voices/stances/gestures.
• The audience are given forms to fill out and analyse each performance focusing on;
performance having a beginning, middle and end; all 4 characters are represented; cross
cultural performance was shown and the overall performance showcased the essence of
melodrama.

5 mins Debriefing
• Ask students to sit in a circle on the floor.
• Debrief the students by asking them to identify something new that they learnt about
melodrama from today’s lesson. Get students to give a high-five to the students sitting
next to them.
• Thank the students and close the lesson. As students leave the room in an orderly
fashion, teacher stands at the door asking each student to tell them “ what is one
difference between Asian melodrama and melodrama from another culture”.

How am I measuring the outcomes of this lesson?

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

4.1.1 Informal questioning and observation of students throughout
the lesson.

Academic Justification

The modifications of the four elements of metalanguage, student direction, cultural knowledge and

problematic knowledge improve the overall Quality Teaching elements (2006) of the lesson in each of the

three categories; intellectual quality, quality learning environment and significance. Also, the lesson shifts

from being passive to active (Finley, 2014).

Cloonan (2011) describes metalanguage as the key element, which supports student and teacher discussion

in any subject and should be embedded into all lessons. Schleppegrell (2013) showed that it is critical to

recognise that learners need opportunities with the use of metalanguage. In this lesson, this can be achieved

by investigating the tone or characteristics of language between characters, linking academic and social

language thus understanding how language is used in the subject of drama (Australian Curriculum, 2019).

Therefore, in the revised lesson plan, by embedding the discussion of the different language used amongst

characters within melodrama, students are able to focus and discuss differing sentences, tone, and symbolic

representation through comparing and contrasting the different language used amongst the melodramatic

characters.

Student direction is one of the main aspects of the Quality Teaching model and is cohesive with learning

autonomy which allows the student to be the key learner while the teacher to guides their individual learning

(Gremmo and Riley, 1995). Hersey and Blanchard (1988) stated that language learning is advanced when

student direction within the classroom has been increased. In creative subjects, such as drama, student

direction should be an element that is automatically integrated within the class due to a focus on creative

thinking and improvisation tasks, which encourage learners to expand their learning in their own way

(Grow, 1991; Karakas & Manisaligil, 2012). Within the revised lesson plan, student direction is improved by

allowing students to select, research, create and perform their interpretations of the assigned brief. The

teacher is now a facilitator of learning, as the students are responsible for the activity in which they engage.

This can be seen in the activity where students choose an envelope with a character written on it researching,

6

the character movements and characteristics thereby engaging students in a practical investigation within a

creative setting.

Similar to the elements of student direction and metalanguage, cultural and problematic knowledge are key

elements for quality teaching, which also adhere to the Australian Teaching Standards (Australian Institute

for Teaching and School Leadership, 2017). Developing cultural knowledge and educating acceptance of

cultural difference, values and traditions is imperative within this lesson content as its subject matter lends

itself admirably. For example, acknowledging how melodramatic characters are represented in Asian culture

compared to Western culture allows students to form their own values and beliefs in developing their

cultural identity and understanding amongst diverse social groups (Kramsch, 1995). Kramsch (1995)

explains that cultural knowledge should be incorporated within syllabus content to enrich learning and

understanding. Similarly, Mascolo (2009) states that showing language as culture both verbally and

physically, students gain a heightened opportunity to understand differing beliefs, skills, knowledge and

practises. Embedding cultural knowledge in the concept of melodrama by allowing students to research,

discuss and create within the revised lesson plan, enables students to demonstrate an understanding of the

differences between Asian and Western Culture in regards to the portrayal of melodramatic characters

thereby assisting student’s development of cultural understanding and cultural competence.

As an element of quality teaching, problematic knowledge links to student direction. Chen (2004) states that

if the student is an active rather than passive learner, their perspective alongside multiple perspectives is

automatically challenged due to valuing student direction within an active classroom environment.

Therefore, problematic knowledge is actively seen as socially constructed and examined through questioning

and discussion (State of NSW, Department of Education and Training, 2006) in this revised lesson plan.

Problematic knowledge is also seen in group work activities where the teacher poses a question which the

group researches and investigates allowing students to address multiple perspectives and solutions (Gremmo

and Riley, 1995). This is evident in the revised lesson plan, where after a group discussion on the four stock

7

heroes in melodrama, students are asked to move into smaller groups and identify three points of the

difference in language and/or appearance between each character. Through this activity students gain an

appreciation of problematic knowledge by exploring the assumptions underpinning their perspectives,

constructing their own knowledge and valuing the different constructions of knowledge.

Enhancing the four elements of metalanguage, student direction, and cultural and problematic knowledge in

this revised lesson plan enables students to not only learn lesson content, but to become active learners who

are encouraged to form new perspectives through physical and intellectual expression, with both the teacher

and student controlling the environment (Blackmer, 2018). As depicted in The Quality Teaching Framework

(Department of Education and Training, 2003) best practice in this revised lesson plan is confirmed by

effectively utilising the elements of learning and teaching such as metalanguage, student direction, and

cultural and problematic knowledge. The modified lesson plan engages in the best practice of connecting

and regulating student’s metalanguage, using student direction to engage in narrative communication,

examining problematic knowledge through teacher and student expectations and integrating and developing

student’s cultural knowledge through engagement in a deeper cultural understanding. Revision of these four

elements of quality teaching, as Chen (2004) declares improves the pedagogy of the teacher whilst also

improving the learning of students.

References

Australian Curriculum (2019). Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-

curriculum/english/Glossary/?term=metalanguage

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2017). Australian

professional standards for teachers. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards

Blackmer, S. (2018, May/June). Movement In The Classroom. Teach. Retrieved from:

https://teachmag.com/archives/10678

Chen, W. (2004). Learning the skill theme approach: salient and problematic aspects of pedagogical content

knowledge. Education, 125(2), 194-212. Retrieved from:

https://web.b.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl

=00131172&AN=15546339&h=6hSO0SQ4ypSQ%2fyvA4b5xd73mdu%2fXM%2fmeTPTY4ryMKQ

mrad18%2biNTYkAas44g6AtqYWRPLrIuawDNevDdE2tmqg%3d%3d&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWe

bAuth&resultLocal=ErrCrlNotAuth&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26profile%3dehost%2

6scope%3dsite%26authtype%3dcrawler%26jrnl%3d00131172%26AN%3d15546339

Cloonan, A. (2011). Creating multimodal metalanguage with teachers.

English teaching: practice and critique, 10, (4), 23-40. Retrieved from:

http://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30042099/cloonan-creatingmultimodal-2011.pdf

Department of Education and Training. (2003). Quality teaching in NSW public schools. Retrieved from

http://www.darcymoore.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/qt_EPSColor.pdf

9

Finley, T. (2014). 8 Strategies for teaching academic language: Ideas for developing students’ capacity to

use discipline-specific terminology and the language used in instruction. George Lucas Educational

Foundation. Retrieved from: https://www.edutopia.org/blog/8-strategies-teaching-academic-language-

todd-finley

Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125–149.

Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848191041003001

Gremmo, M., & Riley, P. (1995). Autonomy, self direction and self access in language teaching and

learning: The history of an idea. System, 23(2), 151-164. Retrieved from:

https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(95)00002-2

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1998). Management of organisational behaviour: utilising human resources

(5th ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Karakas, F., & Manisaligil, A. (2012). Reorienting self-directed learning for the creative digital era.

European Journal of Training and Development, 36 (7), 712-731. Retrieved from:

10.1108/03090591211255557

Kramsch, C. (1995). The cultural component of language in teaching. Journal of Language, Culture and

Curriculum, 8 (2), 83-92, Retrieved from: 10.1080/07908319509525192

Mascolo, M. F. (2009). Beyond student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogy: teaching and learning as

guided participation. Pedagogy and the Human Sciences, 1 (1), 3-27. Retrieved from:

http://scholarworks.merrimack.edu/phs/vol1/iss1/6

10

Schleppegrell, M. (2013). The role of metalanguage in supporting academic language development.

Language Learning, 63 (1), 153-170. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-

9922.2012.00742.x

State of NSW, Department of Education and Training, Professional Learning and Leadership Directorate

(2006). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: a classroom practice guide. (2nd ed). Retrieved

from: https://app.education.nsw.gov.au/quality-teaching

rounds/Assets/Classroom_Practice_Guide_ogogVUqQeB.pdf

11


Link To Teaching Portfolio

https://mlkerr.weebly.com/

12