If I had to assign one word to my experience with lesson planning it would be that lesson planning must be dynamic. I taught four chemistry classes that were filled with students with a wide variety of learning styles, maturity levels, learning speeds and group dynamics. Even things such as time of day and what class that students were coming from made a difference to how the class operated once they got to my classroom. I learned very quickly that even when each class was covering the same material that my lesson plans wouldn’t necessarily always look the same. I needed to adjust my lesson plans to reflect the unique atmosphere of each classroom.

 

As my placement progressed I began to spend more time on my lesson plans. I began to see the need to concentrate on the need to differentiate my instruction for not only classroom to classroom but also to try to focus on some particular students within classrooms. Because my time was divided into two placements, I did not have as much time in my second placement to develop quite as much differentiation as I would have liked, but I did accomplish some. With over 120 students and limited time, I concentrated more on differentiating between classrooms but did get to focus on some differentiation for some individual students.  

 

To differentiate between classrooms I focused on pacing and technique. For instance, one particular class of students needed more time to acquire new material. I adjusted my lesson plans to reflect this by building in time to allow one class to slowly become familiar with the new material and preparing more scaffolding opportunities. Another approach to differentiation was in reference to my sixth period class. Students in this class came directly from lunch and were always full of energy and had a hard time quieting down and focusing. For these students I had to balance building in as activities that could capitalize on this energy but also harness this energy. For instance, it was sometimes difficult for the students to work in partners because their energy would often disintegrate into mindless chatter. To curtail this I planned activities such as group activities that allowed them to work at large whiteboards at various places in the classroom that allowed them to get up and move around but allowed me to move around and check in on their progress. This allowed them to move around a bit but also made their progress very visible.

 

During my placement I took the best parts of lesson planning from both of my cooperating teachers and incorporated them into my own lesson plans. I learned that it’s important to plan ahead and prepare for as many contingencies as possible, but it is just as important to be flexible is it is to be rigorous as in the end the lessons are about the students and their learning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I had the opportunity to work at two different high schools during my time as a student teacher and these were quite different in many respects. One main difference was in the realm of technology. Technology is considered to be such an important aspect in teaching science in all levels of education so this was a great opportunity to observe some possible effects of what it means to have different types of resources within a classroom.

 

The school in my first placement had won a large grant that allowed them to purchase a significant number of laptop computers and flat screen monitors. Because of this and other factors, my first classroom was equipped very differently than my second. In my first classroom the students were seated, 4 at a time, at lab benches that were equipped with gas and water hookups and sinks. Each bench also had a flat screen monitor fastened at one corner. There were eight benches in the classroom outfitted in the same fashion. My cooperating teacher, and then myself, then taught directly from an IPad that was then displayed onto the flat screen monitors at the student benches. I think this method has advantages and disadvantages. On the positive side, the students were able to see the information quickly and clearly. The information was able to be conveyed with high levels of technology that were interesting and fun for both the students and teacher. On the down side I found that the students spent their time looking at the screen and rarely looked at the teacher making it harder to create relationships with the students in that respect—the learning process seemed a bit more removed. When I was teaching I was required to only use the IPad and felt very constrained by this and longed for more diversity. The students did not have any other resources. They did use textbooks or PowerPoint slides. The only information they were given was from notes given on the IPad. The students also enjoyed a very rich laboratory experience.  Their lab was outfitted with up to date equipment and chemicals and the students performed lab experiments regularly.

 

At my second placement the classroom had very little in the way of technology. The students used very old textbooks and whiteboards. They did have a projector and screen. There was only one very underequipped laboratory that all the classrooms shared. This lab had very few chemicals, no water or gas hookups and no safety precautions. There were also differences in the school that are beyond the comparison of this reflection, but for the sake of the discussion of technology I would say my opinion lies somewhere in between.  I find value in using a textbook for many reasons not the least of which is to prepare students for the rigors or reading in college. I also find the value of incorporating as much technology as possible into the classroom. I feel the answer lies in between—to incorporate technology and textbook material and laboratory material in order to ensure the students are receiving a well rounded education.