Complete Peer Review Activity using the Students' Posted Draft of Lesson Plan in this Discussion Board. (Due by 11:59pm, June 16) Each student will be assigned to review 2 of other students' draft of

LED 6510 Lesson Plan Peer Review Form

Title of Lesson Plan Reviewed:

Your Peer’s Name:

Your Name:

Directions: Each student will be assigned 2 peers’ draft of final lesson plan for review on Canvas. Upon completion of reading, do provide your feedback to your peers using the following directions:

1) use the peer-review form to provide overall feedback for the other students' draft of lesson plan; Attach the forms with your feedback to your peers while you have completed peer review activity; 

• Per the requirement, each student’ draft of lesson plan should include the following components (The other components are optional depending on each individual’s progress, so you just provide your feedback based on the content in the lesson plan)

• The below section is mandary to be reviewd and provided with feedback using the guided question in this form, highlighted in red in the form

  • Language comparison, grammar focus of instruction, and establishment of relevance

  • Introductory Statement of Your Language Task

  • Structured input activity, structured practice activity and output assessment activity

2) For the grammatical, spelling, mechanic and other suggestions, kindly use the "Review" or "Track changes" button in the student's original word document and post your comment on the right side of the column of the word document, and then return the document to your peers with your comment/feedback. 

1. Does the author clearly present the grade level of students, concentration domain, materials and digital tools need and time needed for the lesson?

Absolutely yes! Everything about the lesson setup is very clear.

1. Does the author concisely describe the following aspects in Learners & Learning Environment? How can the author improve in each aspect, if any?

• Language comparison, grammar focus of instruction, and establishment of relevance: I thought Phillip did a great job establishing why this task is relevant. The tie to gardens in the community.

• Introductory Statement of Your Language Task: Great job here as well. I think that particularly the way the content and language fit together is awesome.

• Review of Terminology: Hard to mess this one up!

• Annotation: I really loved all your ties to SLA theories. I think this activity will be a great one to help raise students’ awareness of the structure you want them to notice.

1. Does the author concisely define the following aspects in Standard and Outcomes? How can the author improve in each aspect, if any?

Absolutely. No improvement needed. The content vs. language objectives make the lesson outcomes seem even more purposeful.

1. Does the author understand the concepts of structured input activity, structured practice activity and output/assessment activity clearly and concisely?:

Phillip does this very well. In the initial stages, he has the students supply the missing structure that he wants them to notice. My one critique would have been to limit the open-endedness of the fill-in activity, but Phillip did mention a way that he could scaffold the activity if the students struggled with how to write comparisons. Well done!

Does the author demonstrate the structured input activity, structured practice activity and output/assessment activity in a clear and organized way? Does the author provide teaching resources where appropriate and provide detailed explanations and guidelines for this activity? How can the author improve in this area?

Phillip’s activity explanations are all very organized. Also, the way he explains which resources are used and when make the activity very easy to imagine from start to finish, even for someone far removed from the math world.

Notes: You may take the following notes from assignment directions to better evaluate your peer’s instructional activity.

• • Structured Input Activity

Design a Structured Input Activity appropriate to your lesson. This activity must make the grammatical element salient to the learner and must follow principles discussed in class.

• • Structured Practice Activity

You must design a Practice Activity appropriate your lesson. This activity must provide the learner with an opportunity to practice the grammatical element without having to actually produce the grammatical element and should adhere to the principles discussed in class.

• • Output/Assessment Activity

You must design an Output/Assessment Activity that fits the context of your lesson. This activity must provide an opportunity to “check understanding” via production of the form in some way. It should follow the principles discussed in class.

Your Comments and Feedback:

1. Does the author provide annonations as required? Does the author’s annotations indicate understanding of referenced SLA theory? Does the author’s instructional decision is appropriately informed by reference SLA theory?

The annotations Phillip provided clearly referenced SLA theory. It is clear to me that he is thinking along the lines of cognitive theories of language acquisition which promote communicative activities tied to meaning. This is cearly reflected in the content and procedures of the lesson, and particularly the decision to have the students work in pairs! There will be a lot of rich output as they work together, I’m sure.

1. Write your constructive feedback for the author to improve his/her lesson plan in the next stage (grammar, A.P.A., spelling, annonations, other suggestions, etc..)

I think this is very well-written and the APA is spot-on. As I mentioned, this lesson was very easy for me to imagine and I’m not really nor have I ever been very good at math.