You are on page 1of 2

Andrew Milewski

1. What decisions/challenges did you face during the planning process?

The key concept for the lesson, malapropisms, came to me very easy. From there, I sketched out
the majors points of my lesson: i.e. introduction, application, and assessment. One of my first
decisions was deciding how much Shakespeare I wanted to include. I felt that if too much
complicated text was presented it would alienate my audience and make them bored. I decided
that including a lot of examples from popular and contemporary culture would engage my
students more and build a bridge to the more high-brow Shakespeare.

One of the key challenges was timing. Ive never been good at planning out a lesson to the
second when it comes to time. Originally, I had included the section with words to be more of an
independent group project. However, as I realized that would take more time, I decided that it
would save time to complete that application work as a class. This made more sense to me,
because we were also a smaller class.

2. When planning a lesson, you imagined the way it would go. Did your lesson go according to
this "image"? What was different from this "image"? Did anything really surprise you or catch
you off guard?

My lesson was fairly informal. I had my students speak when they wanted. I was also not
satisfied with the amount of time we covered the examples. When I imagined my lesson, my
vision was a little more formal than what I ended up with. I may have been trying to speak to
quickly or making decisions on the fly I should have made ahead of time, such as who is going to
answer each question. I was very happy that the class seemed to enjoy my lesson; my biggest
fear is that they wouldnt have laughed at the examples and dismissed the literary technique.

3. In your opinion, what went really well during your instruction?

I felt that I engaged the students fairly well. I used a variety of examples and activities to make
sure my students understood the concept malapropism. Students spoke up, answered questions,
and engaged with the materials. I also felt that I had good lesson flow. I never had to stop and
backtrack or rephrase myself. Students never looked confused or frustrated. I was happy my
students understood my lesson, but it might have also been the central problem.

4. If you were to do the lesson again, what would you change/add/remove the second time
around?

The central problem of my lesson was that it was a little too basic. I had one term, and my
objectives stemmed out of this term. The fact that I was the only person short shows that I could
have added material to my lesson. If I had to teach a 10 minute lesson again, I would add another
related technique such as rhyme, idiom or another play on words. Using even two different
definitions adds a lot more potential for me as an educator. For example, I can compare and
contrast the techniques, and I can assess if students can differentiate between the two techniques.

5. Did you achieve you objective? How can you be sure?

My objective was to have students define, identity, and create malapropism. I believe that I
accomplished this goal. Throughout the lesson, I had students demonstrate these skills. One point
where I could have improved was making sure each person had a chance to speak. Although I
tried to make sure everyone spoke, I still think some people could have spoken more.