Discussion Critique When observing the two lesson plans demonstrating the discussion strategy, it was discovered how

very different the strategies were. What these lesson plans did have in common, though, was their emphasis on ensuring students knowledge of the topic prior to the discussion. This would be considered a strength since Strategies and Models for Teachers also discussed the importance of prior knowledge in regards to a successful discussion. Lesson plan one showed strength in the aspect of time; this lesson was very structured in the amount of time would be taken up by each part of the activity. Lesson two, though, showed weakness in this area and left the time piece very vague, for example three-five class periods which is very vague. Lesson one did show weakness where lesson two showed strength, which was in the area of the topic. Lesson one, was slightly unclear on what the topic and prior knowledge had to be where lesson two was very specific and clear of the learning objectives. Both lessons followed the three phases of implementing as mentioned in Strategies and Models for Teachers but lesson one slightly went in a different route by creating the discussion part of the lesson very elaborate and extremely structured. For example, in the discussion part of the plan there are six different steps that need to take place to complete the round whereas in lesson plan two, the teacher offers leading questions to create the structure of the discussion. Likewise, I would have conducted a lesson more similar to lesson two considering it was very in tune with the descriptions in the book. Lesson two created the discussion out to be something that was a series of steps that needed to be completed rather than a discussion that argued two sides of a topic.