STAD Critique The two lesson plans used to demonstrate the STAD strategy are very good examples

and provide use for very different subjects, reading and science. Lesson one shows great strengths in the entire outline of the lesson considering each of the steps go with the description of the lesson in Strategies and Models for Teachers. Lesson two shows strengths when explaining the learning objectives, which are done in great depth and are very specific. Both lessons also showed the importance of organization which is important with any lesson. Lesson one did show weakness in the assessment field in which it was lacking a form of assessment. Lesson two had a list of the topics that the students need to be assessed on but no exact form of assessment was noted. In Strategies and Models for Teachers it explains that assessment can take place in a normal fashion such as written quizzes or tests. Both of these lessons venture off from the exact criteria described in the book. In lesson one, th teacher does not show, in the lesson plan, much guidance and even has jobs assigned per group to limit the teachers involvement. In lesson two, the lesson veered off by not having the students in groups, instead the teacher grouped them in pairs. If I were to conduct the lesson, I would combine the two faults and solve them. Instead of having jobs for students like in lesson one, I would facilitate the group work myself. It is crucial for the teacher to be involved in group work to ensure the students are gaining the knowledge I expect of them. I would also not place the students in pairs because this strategy is easier to implement in groups. When students are in pairs it creates more work for the students and for the teacher. When the students are in groups the work can be more easily divided among them and is also easier for the teacher to go around the groups to check their progress.