Daily Lesson Planning An educator’s daily lesson plan is the most detailed and updated guide that they have to facilitate learning in their classroom. In essence, lesson planning is the educator’s opportunity to decide, in advance what curriculum to introduce, the instructional delivery method they will use, and how intended objectives will be assessed. After reading chapter 8, perform these two tasks. Jones, Jones, and Vermette (2011) did a three year study of novice educators’ lesson planning practices to determine if patterns of common blunders may exist in their design process.  Discuss the six most common pitfalls that research uncovered that novice educators make when planning lessons. 8.5 Common  Lesson-Planning  Pitfalls We  will  end  the  chapter  by  discussing  some  of  the  most  common  pitfalls  that  teachers  make  when  designing  lesson  plans. These  pitfalls  apply  to  all  the  lesson  plan  formats  discussed  in  this  chapter.  Jones,  Jones,  and  Vermette  (2011)  conducted  a three-year  study  examining  novice  teachers’  lesson  planning  and  implementation  to  determine  the  six  most  common  lesson-planning  blunders.  Knowing  what  the  most  common  lesson  plan  impediments  are  will  help  you  navigate  around  them.  You  may notice  that  these  are  similar  to  the  pitfalls  to  writing  instructional  objectives,  first  described  in  Chapter  3;  many  of  the  same principles  apply. Unclear  Learning  Objective This  lesson-planning  misstep  happens  when  teachers  focus  on  what  content  they  will  cover  in  the  lesson  instead  of  focusing  on the  learning  outcomes  the  students  will  have  because  of  exposure  to  that  content.  Teachers  who  focus  on  learning  outcomes assure  that  the  lesson  is  learning -centered,  and  eliminate  the  difficulties  of  determining  whether  the  lesson  is  teacher-centered or  student-centered.  How  will  you  know  what  you  want  students  to  learn?  It  is  stated  in  your  instructional  objectives.  To overcome  this  pitfall,  write  the  learning  outcome  from  the  student’s  perspective.  For  example,  “At  the  end  of  this  lesson,  I  can identify  five  types  of  carbohydrates”  or  “I  can  compare  and  contrast  mitosis  and  meiosis.” Assessment  of  Understanding  Not  Administered New  teachers,  overwhelmed  with  classroom-management  issues,  administration  tasks,  and  extensive  content  to  cover, sometime  continue  teaching  without  ever  stopping  to  see  what  (if  anything)  students  have  learned.  In  many  cases,  discussion  is the  sole  way  to  evaluate  student  thinking.  While  this  strategy  is  a  useful  formative  assessment,  without  any  tangible  evidence  of student  learning,  there  is  no  real  accountability  or  indication  that  students  have  learned  anything  at  all.  To  overcome  this pitfall,  consider  authentic  assessment  as  a  strategy  so  th.

1. Daily Lesson Planning
An educator’s daily lesson plan is the most detailed and updated
guide that they have to facilitate learning in their classroom. In
essence, lesson planning is the educator’s opportunity to decide,
in advance what curriculum to introduce, the instructional
delivery method they will use, and how intended objectives will
be assessed. After reading chapter 8, perform these two tasks.
Jones, Jones, and Vermette (2011) did a three year study of
novice educators’ lesson planning practices to determine if
patterns of common blunders may exist in their design process.
Discuss the six most common pitfalls that research uncovered
that novice educators make when planning lessons.
8.5
Common
Lesson-Planning
Pitfalls
We
will
end
the
chapter
by
discussing
some
of
the
most
common
pitfalls
that
teachers
make
when
designing

2. lesson
plans.
These
pitfalls
apply
to
all
the
lesson
plan
formats
discussed
in
this
chapter.
Jones,
Jones,
and
Vermette
(2011)
conducted
a
three-year
study
examining
novice
teachers’
lesson
planning
and
implementation
to
determine
the
six
most

3. common
lesson-planning
blunders.
Knowing
what
the
most
common
lesson
plan
impediments
are
will
help
you
navigate
around
them.
You
may
notice
that
these
are
similar
to
the
pitfalls
to
writing
instructional
objectives,
first
described
in
Chapter

4. 3;
many
of
the
same
principles
apply.
Unclear
Learning
Objective
This
lesson-planning
misstep
happens
when
teachers
focus
on
what
content
they
will
cover
in
the
lesson
instead
of
focusing
on
the
learning
outcomes
the
students
will

5. have
because
of
exposure
to
that
content.
Teachers
who
focus
on
learning
outcomes
assure
that
the
lesson
is
learning
-centered,
and
eliminate
the
difficulties
of
determining
whether
the
lesson
is
teacher-centered
or
student-centered.
How
will
you

6. know
what
you
want
students
to
learn?
It
is
stated
in
your
instructional
objectives.
To
overcome
this
pitfall,
write
the
learning
outcome
from
the
student’s
perspective.
For
example,
“At
the
end
of
this
lesson,
I
can

7. identify
five
types
of
carbohydrates”
or
“I
can
compare
and
contrast
mitosis
and
meiosis.”
Assessment
of
Understanding
Not
Administered
New
teachers,
overwhelmed
with
classroom-management
issues,
administration
tasks,
and
extensive
content
to
cover,
sometime
continue
teaching
without

8. ever
stopping
to
see
what
(if
anything)
students
have
learned.
In
many
cases,
discussion
is
the
sole
way
to
evaluate
student
thinking.
While
this
strategy
is
a
useful
formative
assessment,
without
any
tangible
evidence
of
student

9. learning,
there
is
no
real
accountability
or
indication
that
students
have
learned
anything
at
all.
To
overcome
this
pitfall,
consider
authentic
assessment
as
a
strategy
so
that
students
create
a
learning
product
that
is
evidenced
in

10. an
active
and
visible
process
that
helps
students
link
content
learned
to
the
intended
learning
objectives.
Failure
to
Collect
Multiple
Formative
Assessments
During
Lesson
To
provide
clues
to
students’
current
level
of
understanding,
teachers
should
use

11. multiple
means
of
collecting
information
about
students’
thinking
throughout
the
lesson.
They
can
then
use
this
information
to
differentiate
instruction
to
meet
learners’
exact
needs.
A
strong
focus
on
evidence
creation
during
the
lesson
will
help

12. document
student
achievement.
To
overcome
this
pitfall,
consider
interspersing
throughout
the
lesson
plan
Wiggins
and
McTighe’s
(2011)
deconstruction
of
understanding
into
six
facets:
explain,
interpret,
apply,
perspective,
empathy,
and
self-knowledge.
Assessment
Fails
to
Match
the
Learning

13. Objective
By
mismatching
the
assessment
of
learning
with
the
instructional
objective,
you
will
never
know
if
the
objective
was
met.
This
pitfall
can
be
tricky
because
teachers
assume
that
students
who
are
engaged
in
the
assigned

14. task
will
automatically
gain
the
cognitive
attribute
intended.
To
overcome
this
pitfall,
consider
using
learning
targets
and
the
backward
design
process
(Stiggins,
2008;
Wiggins
&
McTighe,
2011)
and
begin
lesson
planning
with
“identify
desired
results.”
Rather

15. than
beginning
lesson
planning
with
a
set
of
topics
you
need
to
cover
and
then,
after
the
fact,
creating
an
assessment
to
match
the
topics,
begin
with
the
walk-away
knowledge,
skills,
or
dispositions
you
want
students

16. to
have
and
then
schedule
activities
that
will
lead
to
these
take-aways.
(For
more
information
on
the
backward
planning
process,
see
Chapter
4.)
Lesson
Plan
Lacks
an
Engaging
Start
Beginning
a
lesson
with
a
quick
“hook”

17. with
little
or
no
meaningful
student
engagement
leads
to
students
being
frustrated
and
unfocused
rather
than
motivated
to
learn.
Failure
to
start
the
lesson
effectively
leads
to
classroom-management
issues,
confusion,
and
off-task
behaviors.
To
overcome
this

18. pitfall,
take
the
beginning
of
the
lesson
time
to
create
conditions
in
which
the
students
can
play
with
ideas
to
help
assimilate
new
concepts
into
their
existing
schema.
This
activity
may
take
a
longer
or
shorter

19. amount
of
time
depending
on
the
discovery
task,
level
of
students’
motivation,
or
depth
of
prior
knowledge.
Students
Are
Passive
Recipients
of
Knowledge
Lessons
that
only
involve
PowerPoint
presentations
or
teacher
lectures
in
which
students
sit

20. quietly
and
listen
have
been
shown
to
be
ineffective.
Likewise,
lessons
that
focus
on
recollection
of
facts
rather
than
a
negotiation
of
conceptual
meaning
are
also
ineffective
for
enduring
understanding.
Plan
instructional
strategies
that
are
student-centered

21. and
learning
oriented.
The
traditional
“passive
learner”
paradigm
is
easier
to
overcome
if
preservice
teachers
are
able
to
experience
effective
teaching
during
their
own
K–16
experiences.
CONSIDER
THIS
What
do
you
think
is
the
most

22. damaging
lesson-planning
pitfall?
Why?
Read Valerie’s case from the classroom found in section 8.6 in
your textbook.
Answer question number three: “Valerie claims to use three
different planning models: direct instruction, inquiry based
(specifically, the 5E model), and social interaction, depending
on the day, the objective, and the activity. Critique her match of
models with the lesson purpose. Offer your own examples of
each of these models for a curricular area of your choice.”
(Hansen et al., 2015)
chapter 8.6
From
the
Desk
of:
Valerie
March
7
Hello
Dr.
Z.—
So,
you
want
to
know
about
lesson

23. planning?
Well,
let
me
tell
you—it
isn’t
always
as
easy
or
as
logical
as
the
textbooks
make
it
out
to
be.
This
is
something
I
have
had
to
learn
the
hard
way—because
with
35
squirmy
eighth

24. graders
in
each
of
my
science
classes,
many
whose
hormones
are
rising
here
in
the
spring
and
all—well,
you
just
can’t
afford
to
come
to
school
unprepared—and
live
to
tell
about
it,
that
is.
I
can’t

25. always
think
in
the
“heat
of
the
battle.”
I
have
to
have
the
relevant
vocabulary
terms
listed
out,
and
at
least
the
words
I
am
going
to
use
to
explain
them,
or
I
end
up
getting

26. my
“mords
wixed
up!”
Then
I
can
relax
and
let
the
planned
activities
just
flow.
But,
not
just
any
activity—it
has
to
relate
to
what
we
are
doing
in
science
or
they
start
to
just
“blow

27. it
off.”
So,
I
find
lesson
planning
to
be
difficult,
but
necessary.
I
work
mainly
from
the
eighth-grade
science
syllabus
and
the
unit
plans
that
we
put
together
with
other
science
teachers
from
the
district
last

28. fall.
I
developed
a
lesson
plan
form
that
I
saved
as
a
template
in
Word,
so
it
comes
up
each
time
as
a
blank
document
and
it
automatically
saves
to
a
different
name
without
locking
up

29. my
original
form.
I
plan
for
one
week
at
a
time—sometimes
two,
if
I
have
the
time,
and
try
to
make
sure
I
know
what
I
am
doing
in
general
the
next
week
by
Friday
of

30. each
week.
That
way
I
can
enjoy
the
weekend
more,
and
not
have
that
feeling
of
dread
that
used
to
hit
on
Sunday
afternoon.
Next
year
should
be
easier,
since
I
will
have
most
of
the

31. details
already
developed,
and
can
modify
the
lessons
depending
on
the
students
and
what
I
have
to
work
with,
instead
of
starting
from
scratch.
The
models
for
lesson
planning
that
we
learned
at
university
are
useful,

32. and
I
have
tweaked
them
a
bit
to
make
them
relevant
to
my
own
teaching
context.
I
know
(and
have
been
taught
over
and
over
again)
that
one
plans
from
the
objectives
and
the
assessment,
and

33. then
develops
the
activities
to
match.
While
this
works
to
keep
me
focused,
I
still
think
about
the
activity,
or
how
to
teach
the
objective,
while
planning
the
assessment,
because
for
me
it
really
is
a

34. recursive
process.
Like,
how
can
you
unpack
a
standard
if
you
have
no
idea
about
what
the
student
could
be
doing
to
demonstrate
that
understanding?
Another
thing
that
makes
planning
easier
for
me
is
to
get

35. a
weekly
routine
that
I
can
use
to
structure
the
learning
objectives
and
assessment
around.
For
example,
Monday
I
introduce
a
new
concept
(or
bring
in
new
information
regarding
a
concept
from
the
week
before),
and

36. plan
for
a
demonstration,
some
lecture,
some
discussion,
and
a
jigsaw
group
or
two.
So
the
learning
objectives
and
assessments
for
that
day
focus
on
an
NGSS
disciplinary
core
idea,
and
the
ability
to
explain
the

37. concept
in
one’s
own
words.
For
example,
the
core
idea
for
these
next
two
weeks
is:
Plate
tectonics
is
the
unifying
theory
that
explains
the
past
and
current
movements
of
the
rocks
at
Earth’s
surface
and

38. provides
a
framework
for
understanding
its
geologic
history.
(ESS2.B
Grade
8
GBE)
My
objective
for
Monday’s
lesson
was
for
the
students
to
explain
the
terms
fault
and
plate
boundaries
,
to
define
the
various
types
of

39. faults,
normal,
reverse
,
and
strike
slip
,
and
the
various
types
of
plate
boundaries,
divergent,
convergent
,
and
transform
.
On
Tuesday,
I
scheduled
a
lab
activity
that
investigated
the
core
idea
presented
on
Monday.

40. So
the
objectives
and
assessments
related
to
science
and
engineering
practices
(from
the
NGSS)
applied
to
the
topic,
like
constructing
explanations.
We
took
pieces
of
foam
blocks
and
cut
them
to
represent
the
types
of
faults

41. and
fault
boundaries,
and
discussed
concepts
such
as
extension,
moving
apart,
down-dropped
blocks,
and
devised
explanations
of
what
happens
when
these
faults
move,
as
in
an
earthquake.
Wednesdays
are
research
days.
We
took
the
essential
questions

42. from
this
part
of
the
unit,
the
observations
from
the
lab
reports,
and
working
in
teams
(usually
four)
formulated
a
specific
question
and
organized
an
Internet
research
strategy—using
the
laptop
carts
that
are
reserved
on
that

43. day.
We
started
with
a
site
that
allowed
the
students
to
chart
the
movement
of
land
masses
to
better
understand
plate
tectonics,
and
then
they
developed
their
own
questions
to
research
from
there.
Thursday
is
model-planning

44. day—the
teams
report
to
each
other
on
the
results
of
their
research
and
develop
one
visual
model
(2D
or
3D)
per
team
of
what
they
found
in
their
research.
The
models
must
depict
the
cross-cutting
concepts

45. associated
with
that
standard.
For
example,
in
the
current
unit
(plate
tectonics),
the
concepts
they
must
show
are
either
a
pattern
(like
a
numerical
relationship)
or
a
scale
(some
concepts
are
too
small
to
see,
and

46. others
occur
too
slowly;
they
must
show
what
scale
they
are
using).
On
Friday,
each
team
presents
the
visual
model
and
everyone
submits
an
individually
written
report
on
what
was
learned.
When
planning,
I
match
up

47. the
objectives
and
assessment
strategies
to
the
activity
type,
and
then
schedule
that
objective
for
the
corresponding
day.
Is
this
the
best
way
to
do
it?
I
don’t
know.
In
an
ideal
world,
Internet
research
and

48. labs
would
be
more
spontaneous,
driven
by
“teachable
moments”
as
they
arise.
But
I
can
only
schedule
a
set
of
laptops
one
day
per
week—they
are
shared
with
other
classrooms.
And
the
lab
is
only
available

49. one
day
per
week—so
I
have
to
plan
carefully.
Not
only
that—I
have
two
students
with
disabilities
in
the
fourth-period
class,
and
several
students
throughout
the
day
who
struggle
academically,
and
at
least
ten
students
scattered

50. among
the
classes
who
are
eager,
interested,
and
clearly
ready
for
advanced
work.
So,
within
these
activity-scheduled
days,
I
can
plan
for
some
predictable
differences
in
advance.
For
instance,
I
always
post
my
notes,
PowerPoints,
video

51. clips,
and
websites
that
explain
the
same
or
similar
concepts
as
the
book
chapter
to
Edmodo,
our
course
LMS,
so
the
students
can
view
them
at
home
ahead
of
time
or
after
class.
Those
who
are

52. still
learning
academic
English
or
who
read
slowly
can
use
computer
screen
readers
to
go
over
the
information
one
more
time.
On
Wednesday,
research
day,
students
who
want
to
explore
advanced
concepts
can
do
so.
And

53. I
try
to
mix
the
groups
up
so
that
each
is
as
balanced
as
possible
with
each
group
having
a
mix
of
abilities.
So
what
planning
model
do
I
use?
That
also
depends
on
the
day,

54. the
objective,
and
the
activity.
I
think
that
in
eighth-grade
science,
given
the
resources
and
schedule
that
I
have
to
work
with,
disciplinary
core
ideas
(from
the
NGSS)
are
best
introduced
with
a
direct-instruction
approach.
This

55. seems
to
be
the
most
efficient
for
me.
And
it
matches
what
I
know
about
teaching
content—you
have
to
start
somewhere
with
science
concepts—read,
or
listen,
or
view
a
video
clip.
We
still
explore
and
wonder

56. using
this
type
of
lesson—I
always
have
them
develop
a
prediction
or
pose
questions.
Now
that’s
a
hard
one.
They
are
so
accustomed
to
trying
to
figure
out
correct
answers,
it
is
really
hard
for
them

57. to
ask
a
relevant
question.
On
Tuesday
and
Wednesday,
I
definitely
use
a
5E
plan,
since
it
fits
so
well
with
science,
and
it
is
more
of
an
inquiry-based
approach.
The
students
are
getting
used
to

58. it;
at
first,
they
just
wanted
me
to
tell
them
the
answers.
I
guess
I
use
a
social-interaction
approach
on
Thursday
and
Friday,
since
they
are
primarily
working
in
groups
and
have
to
figure
out
how

59. to
report
their
findings.
Gotta
go—team
planning
meeting
in
five
minutes—see
you
Friday
and
we
will
catch
up.
—Valerie
Observation
Notes
From
Dr.
Zwijacz
March
14
This
week’s
post
from
Valerie
illustrates
the
thought
processes
that

60. many
novice
teachers
go
through
when
planning.
While
she
understands
the
value
of
lesson
planning
and
the
confidence
it
brings
to
implementation,
she
is
surprised
by
how
much
time
it
takes.
Furthermore,
when
asked
to
analyze

61. how
she
plans,
she
realizes
that
the
linear
process
explained
in
most
textbooks
is
only
part
of
the
story.
Like
many
other
new
teachers,
Valerie
plans
with
the
content
and
an
activity
in
mind,
and
then

62. adapts
it
to
make
sure
it
aligns
with
the
objective
and
assessment
systems.
At
this
point
in
her
development
as
a
teacher,
she
still
has
to
make
those
connections
explicit.
I
noticed
how
her
organizational
schedule

63. is
really
an
attempt
to
reduce
the
cognitive
load
of
planning.
Given
the
complexities
of
the
content,
the
student
needs,
and
the
limitations
on
resources,
she
is
developing
manageable
strategies
that
meet
the
needs
of
most

64. of
her
students
at
the
same
time.
The
routines
that
she
developed
provide
a
logical
structure
for
those
strategies
and
allow
her
to
concentrate
on
delivering
the
curriculum.
One
place
that
has
been
especially
helpful
in

65. instructional
planning
is
an
activity
types
taxonomy,
http://activitytypes.wmwikis.net/HOME
.
This
site
lists
three
basic
activity
types
for
science:
conceptual
knowledge
building
(such
as
read,
attend
to
a
demonstration,
or
discuss),
procedural
knowledge
(such
as
practice,
prepare,

66. record
data,
or
collect
samples),
and
knowledge
expression
(such
as
write
a
report,
create
an
image,
develop
a
model,
or
develop
a
concept
map).
This
site
also
offers
a
taxonomy
of
activity
types
for
other
subject

67. areas,
such
as
literacy,
mathematics,
music,
science,
social
studies,
visual
arts—and
more.
A
number
of
teachers
have
used
this
site
to
help
focus
their
thinking
in
planning.
In
most
cases,
well-defined
objectives
and
assessments
can
be

68. interpreted
as
aligning
to
one
or
more
of
these
activity
types,
and
the
suggestions
can
spark
teacher
thinking
on
appropriate
activities.
I
followed
up
with
Valerie
regarding
the
team
meeting
she
was
heading
to.
Her
team

69. has
decided
that
next
year,
they
want
to
develop
at
least
one
thematic
and
interdisciplinary
unit
in
the
fall,
and
plan
for
one
project-based
unit
in
the
spring.
To
help
with
the
planning,
they
have
decided

70. to
embark
on
a
lesson
study
among
the
members
of
the
team;
the
eighth-grade
teachers
of
math,
science,
English,
social
studies,
technology,
and
art.
The
purpose
of
the
lesson
study
is
to
learn
something
about
the

71. content
of
each
other’s
classes,
and
to
identify
places
where
the
content
could
be
integrated
for
a
theme
or
a
project.
For
example,
Valerie
requires
that
the
visual
models
her
students
produce
use
cross-cutting
concepts
identified

72. in
the
standards,
and
she
makes
sure
that
she
tries
to
connect
to
the
state
Common
Core
Standards
in
ELA
and
Math
as
much
as
possible.
She
doesn’t
always
see
the
connections
that
could
be
made,

73. however.
In
the
plate
tectonics
series
of
lesson
plans,
for
example,
visual
models
could
be
explained
by
using
variables
in
a
mathematical
problem.
The
math
teacher
readily
sees
those
connections,
while
it
might
take
Valerie
a

74. bit
longer,
if
at
all,
to
discover
and
add
them
to
her
lesson.
So,
the
team
is
embarking
on
a
lesson
study
to
familiarize
themselves
with
each
other’s
curriculum
and
ways
of
planning
and
structuring
a

75. lesson,
in
the
hopes
of
generating
some
ideas
for
their
goals
for
the
following
year.
And,
guess
who
is
presenting
first!
—Celina
Zwijacz,
Ph.D.
Discussion
Questions
Visit
the
learning
activity
types
wiki
provided
by
the

76. College
of
William
and
Mary
School
of
Education,
and
review
a
set
of
activity
types
for
one
of
the
subject
areas
listed.
(Go
to
http://activitytypes.wmwikis.net/HOME
.)
Discuss
possible
connections
between
this
taxonomy
of
activities
and
the

77. objectives
and
assessments
of
any
plausible
daily
lesson
plan.
What
descriptions
would
need
to
be
added
to
assure
an
alignment
of
an
activity
with
objective
and
assessment?
The
lesson-planning
process
described
in
this
chapter
is
linear,

78. but
the
process
that
Valerie
and
Dr.
Z.
speak
of
describes
a
more
recursive
thought
and
action.
What
are
your
thoughts
as
you
plan
a
lesson?
Describe
your
mental
processes.
Valerie
claims
to
use
three
different

79. planning
models:
direct
instruction,
inquiry
based
(specifically,
the
5E
model),
and
social
interaction,
depending
on
the
day,
the
objective,
and
the
activity.
Critique
her
match
of
models
with
the
lesson
purpose.
Offer
your
own
examples
of

80. each
of
these
models
for
a
curricular
area
of
your
choice.