18798005 Nana Iwasaki

102086 Designing Teaching & Learning

Assignment 2 Lesson plan analysis

Contents

Original Lesson Plan..……………………………………………………………………..….2

Lesson Plan Analysis…………………………………………………………………...…..…4

Modified Lesson Plan………………………………………………………………................8

Academic Justification…………………………………………………………………........14

References…………………………………………………………………………………...18

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………….21

Learning Portfolio Web Link………………………………………………………………..22

1
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Original Lesson Plan

2
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Lesson plan found from teacer.org (2017). Retrieved May 2, 2017, from
http://www.teacher.org/lesson-plan/analogy-creation
For year 8 (stage 4) English and Language Arts for 1 – 2 class period.

3
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

102086 Designing Teaching & Learning 1H 2017

Assignment 2: APST and QT Analysis Template

Section 1: Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

Evaluate the lesson plan according to the following Australian Professional Standards for
Teachers. Only standards directly addressed in Designing Teaching & Learning that are
relevant to this assignment have been included. However, this does not mean the other
standards are irrelevant to lesson planning and evaluation more generally.

Evaluation score – 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)

Comments incl. evidence for evaluation score (2 sentences)

1 Know students and how they learn

1.3 Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Not mentioned although there is scope to allow for this in the
–5 lesson plan. Teachers can allow more time for those students who are
struggling and provide alternative tasks for these students.
1.4 Strategies for teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Not mentioned at all about this in the lesson plan.
–5
1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range
of abilities
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Mentioned once that teachers will decide on the number of
–5 analogies the students are required to work on, but this is not necessarily
allowing more tasks for capable students.
1.6 Strategies to support full participation of students with disability
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: No mention at all in the lesson plan, however, a whole school
–5 approach as a part of an inclusion program could assist.
2 Know the content and how to teach it
2.2 Content selection and organization
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The lesson plan’s objectives clearly state what is required to learn
–5 for students and allows options for students to work on words from the current
literature being read by the class prior.
2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The lesson finishes by conducting a quiz or test in order to sum
–5 up the content students learn in the lesson and assess whether or not students
have understood the content. This is the example of informal assessment.
2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: ICT is only used when students are looking up words on Internet
–5 dictionary. There is scope for this lesson to incorporate ICT.
3 Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
3.1 Establish challenging learning goals
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Outcomes for this lesson were clearly stated, however, the lesson
–5 itself is quiet straightforward so it would be fairly easy for most of the
students.
3.2 Plan, structure and sequence learning programs
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The structure of the lesson plan is organised and undergoes a
–5 series of repetition and creating connections between words that help them

4
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

accommodate new knowledge.

3.3 Use teaching strategies
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Teaching strategies mostly seem to be led by teachers. The
–5 teacher could allow students time for discussion or inquiry throughout the
class as it only mentioned at the end of the class.
3.4 Select and use resources
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The lesson plan is highly limited in resources as they only use
–5 pen, paper and paper or Internet dictionary.
4 Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
4.1 Support student participation
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The teacher allows students to discuss their opinions and ideas
–5 only in the beginning of the class. There is scope for the lesson to be consisted
with more group works as to help student participation.
4.2 Manage classroom activities
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Not mentioned in the lesson plan, but the teacher should
–5 continuously scan the classroom and provide alternative tasks to students who
are struggling or advanced.
4.3 Manage challenging behavior
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Not specifically mentioned. When conducting individual tasks
–5 which repeat on the same procedure of analogy creation, some students might
find it boring and disengaged.
4.4 Maintain student safety
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Not mentioned in the lesson plan at all.
–5
4.5 Use ICT safely, responsibly and ethically
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: ICT is only mentioned when it comes to the use of Internet
–5 dictionary. There is scope for this to integrate the lesson with Kahoot quiz and
YouTube clip shown to the class.
5 Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
5.1 Assess student learning
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Informal assessment is used at the end of the class to assess the
–5 lesson overall.
5.2 Provide feedback to students on their learning
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Feedback was not specifically given until the end of the lesson
–5 where the teacher explained to them how they could have completed the
analogy task more easily.

Section 2: NSW Quality Teaching Model

Evaluate the lesson plan according to the following NSW Quality Teaching model elements.

Evaluation score – refer to NSW QTM Classroom Practice Guide for each element
Comments incl. evidence for evaluation score (2 sentences)

1 Intellectual quality
1.1 Deep knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: This lesson were entirely focused on creating analogy, however,
–5 could have provided deeper knowledge if the words students were working
related to the literature they previously worked on so as to build up on their prior

5
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

knowledge.
1.2 Deep understanding
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Students were given the opportunities to express their thoughts at the
–5 beginning of the class and go through repetition that shows whether students are
understanding the concept or not.
1.3 Problematic knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: At the beginning of the lesson, teacher asked students to discuss the
–5 reasons why some words are related and others are not. The lesson is scaffolded,
however, and can be easily followed.
1.4 Higher-order thinking
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Students can potentially perform high-order thinking when it comes
–5 to explaining the relationship between certain words, but again the lesson is
heavily scaffolded.
1.5 Metalanguage
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Analogy, connection, similarity and differences are metalanguage
–5 and used throughout the lesson. The teacher also pause the class at the beginning
to explain the relationship between the words.
1.6 Substantive communication
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The lesson requires students to express their thoughts about
–5 connections between words at the beginning and when doing individual task they
also have to reflect their understanding on the words. However, it was mainly the
teacher explaining certain concepts.
Quality learning environment
2.1 Explicit quality criteria
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Lesson clearly explains the process of creating analogy and the
–5 numbers of analogy students are expected to create.
2.2 Engagement
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Lesson doe not explicitly show evidence of engagement except for
–5 the opening to the lesson where students can actively discuss their thoughts.
2.3 High expectations
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: There is no high expectation specifically set out for this lesson. The
–5 teacher should constantly remind them what is required and encourage them to
work individually or in pairs.
2.4 Social support
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Lesson allows an option for students to work in pairs, however, in
–5 the original lesson plan, students work individually and teacher seems to simply
stand and observe the class.
2.5 Students’ self-regulation
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: there are no specific time set out for each section in the lesson plan,
–5 it seems like students can manage their time to work on analogy creations.
2.6 Student direction
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Can only be seen at the beginning of the class when students are
–5 asked to think of two words that can be connected similarly. For the rest,
students are only allowed to work on the words that are given by the teacher.
3 Significance
3.1 Background knowledge
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Objectives mention the goals of the overall lesson and the words
–5 chosen by the teacher are based on the grade-appropriate level, however, there is
a scope for this lesson to accommodate prior knowledge by using the literature
being read by class previously.

6
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

3.2 Cultural knowledge

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: There was no mention about other cultures or social groups in the
–5 lesson. This would be a hard aspect to include, but perhaps there is a scope if
words are coming from history area and talk about the similarities or differences
between the words.
3.3 Knowledge integration
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: The lesson is about analogy creation and can be integrated with the
–5 literacy skills, however, the links are not made explicit to students.
3.4 Inclusivity
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: No mention about inclusivity at all in the lesson.
–5
3.5 Connectedness
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: Though students are asked to explain the connection between words,
–5 there is no specific section in the lesson that talks about connectedness. Possibly
when reviewing the analogy and the use of them, teacher can allow for a
discussion of analogy outside the classroom learning.
3.6 Narrative
1 – 2 – 3 – 4 Comments: There was not any narrative used in the lesson such as personal
–5 stories or passage.

Section 3: Identifying Areas for Improvement

Identify the two APST standards and two NSW QT model elements you are targeting for
improvement.

APST
1) 1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the 2) 2.6 Information and communication
specific learning needs of students across the technology (ICT)
full range of abilities.
QT model
1) 2.2. Engagement 2) 2.6 Student direction

7
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Lesson Plan

Topic area: Stage of Learner: Syllabus Pages: English p116,126

English/Language Arts Stage 4 Language: p14,15,16
Date: Location Booked: Lesson Number:
12/05/2017 Room with ICT resources available
Time: 60 minutes Total Number of students Printing/preparation
1. Paper or Internet dictionary
23 2. Whiteboard
3. Marker
4. Analogy worksheet
5. Smart deivices
6. Youtube clip on analogy
7. Kahoot quiz on the lesson
recap

Outcomes Assessment Students learn about Students learn to

Syllabus outcomes Lesson assessment Define randomly chosen Increase their vocabulary
words, and create through the development of
EN4-1A - Responds to Checking on each analogies based on an analogies by:
and composes texts for student and as a identified relationship A. Using Google doc to put
understanding, class to ensure using the two words as a their work together into one
interpretation, critical students are starting point. B. Innovatively collaborating
analysis, imaginative understanding the with their fellow students
expression and pleasure. concept within a pair work
From English Syllabus:
Questioning the Outcome 1 From Year 7 English
class throughout the Responding and Australian Curriculum:
EN4-6C – Identifies and lesson as to prove composing texts - Understand how text
explains connections that students are structures can influence the
between and among texts. engaged Outcome 6 complexity of a text and
Explain the similarities dependent on audience,
Alternative tasks for and differences in purpose and context.
students who are meaning and language - Explain issues and ideas
LXX4-2C – Identifies ahead of schedule. between texts created for from a variety of sources,
main ideas and obtains For example: different purposes or analysing supporting
information in texts. analogy sheet audience. evidence and implied
meaning.
Google doc From language syllabus:
collaboration Obtaining, processing, From Language Syllabus:
LXX4-2U – demonstrates conveying and responding - Interacting to exchange
understanding of Informal assessment to information through a information, ideas and
grammatical structures to task via Kahoot range of spoken, written, opinions.
present information and digital and/or multimodal - Understand the language
express a range of ides texts system, including sound,
writing, grammar and text
structure.

Cross Curriculum themes & General capabilities Explicit subject specific concepts and skills
Personal and social capability – pair work ACELY1730 - Interpret the stated and implied meanings

8
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

ICT capability – Kahoot, google doc in spoken texts, and use evidence to support or challenge
Critical and creative thinking – practical different perspectives.
component as well as the discussion part ACELY1733 - Apply increasing knowledge of vocabulary,
Literacy – increasing vocabulary text structures and language features to understand the
content of text.

Time Teaching and Organisation Centred

learning actions T/S
Intro Explanation of the Teacher: Write on the whiteboard of the content and activities Teacher
class content that are covered in the class
The teacher explains to
3 the class what they Student: Students settle in and listen to the teacher
minutes will be doing today
Resources: whiteboard and marker

Body Questions and Teacher: Teacher asks these questions to the class and for the Student
reflections volunteer to answer the questions.
The teacher asks the
7 class to work in pairs: Student: Students reflect on themselves and answer the
minutes Does anyone know questions.
what analogy is?
How/when do you use Resources: Pen and paper for the students to write their thoughts.
them?
Where can you see
analogies?

In the end, the teacher

gives his/her own
definition and lists of
response to these
questions.
5 Video demonstration Teacher: set up the Youtube clip and plays it - Teacher
minutes Student will watch a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r120aIfa_6s
short Youtube video
clip that explains Student: watching the video
briefly about analogy.
This aims at reaching Resources: Youtube hyperlink or set up on screen ready to be
differentiated learning played
and makes the
theoretical idea into
visual cues so that it is
easy to understand.

Question and Teacher: The teacher needs to put up two words on the Student
discussion whiteboard.
7 Display two words that
minutes seemingly have no Student: Engage in class discussion.
connection to each
other. Allowing students who might need paper or Internet dictionary to
Ask students the use to define the words, otherwise encourage students to critically
similarities or think the meaning of words.
differences between
the two words. Pair learning to increase engagement with tasks.

9
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Ask how they can

somehow be either Resources: Two random word cards and a set of responses.
connected, shown as
opposites, or another
type of analogy.
Display a brief list of
some of the response.

Collaborating task Teacher: Giving instruction to students and asking them to take Student
Ask students think of out their smart devices. The teacher then provides students the
10 two other words that link for google doc. Walking around the room observing students
minutes can be connect working on the task and providing help where needed.
similarly. Throughout this step, teachers should create healthy environment
Once students respond for students so that they can freely ask questions.
with a logical pair of
words display all four Student: Students take out their smart devices.
words shown as an
analogy. Resources: Google doc link -
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r-
_o0PsTN079egQG5E2Rg4_gOTWFNDnWYKNVTUTjYE4/edit

Collaborating task Teacher: Explains to the class that students are still using the Student
15 continuum google doc as a collaborating platform.
minutes Explain to the student
this is what they will Direct the student to pair up into two and pick words to work on.
be doing with random
words that they like to Teacher should continuously scan through the classroom as a
work on and in pairs whole and individually to see if any students are struggling and
with the same interest. provide help where applicable.

Students can choose Teacher also should also focus on providing more scaffolding for
any words from any less capable students whilst extending capable students.
subjects (e.g. history,
math, science or Continuously walk around the class to see if any help is needed.
languages) or interests
(e.g. sports, music,
food or fashion) or
category (e.g. noun, Student: Conducting pair tasks on chosen words. Allows capable
verb or adjective students to teach and guide less capable students.
based) as a starting
point and pair up with Ask questions if they do not understand anything.
students with same or
similar interests.

Students choose two

words from the chosen
interests.

Student will define

each word and once
defined, students are to
reflect on the words to
find a connection
between them.

10
18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Once connections are

found, students will
use the dictionary or
think of words to use Resources: Google doc link -
an analogy to the https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r-
original words. _o0PsTN079egQG5E2Rg4_gOTWFNDnWYKNVTUTjYE4/edit

Students will write

analogy on the google
doc page. Analogy worksheet – See the sample in the appendix

Students will repeat

this procedure with
two more chosen
words.

Additional activity:
once students
complete this
procedure, they can
either choose to
complete analogy
work sheet during the
lesson or as
homework.

11
 18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Conclusion Reflection and discussion Teacher: Encourage the class to Teacher

- What was the important thing
you learn while creating your
analogy?
8 minutes - What difficulties did you have
and how you could have done
more easily completing the
analogy task?
make further inquiries in a relation
to the lesson content. Provide
model answers to the two
questions.
Student: Students discuss in a
pair of two. Class reflection and
sharing their thoughts on the
analogy creation.

Resources: Not specifically

required.
5 minutes Recap – Kahoot quiz Teacher: Set up the kahoot quiz. Student
Teacher asks students to go to
a. Analogy is a… Kahoot and gives the game pin
1. Random words (9091012). Remind them that it is
2. Syntax 3. Literary based on the lesson content about
4. Noun analogies, what they are and some
b. What is analogy? questions. Include words that are
1. it is used to express grade appropriate.
agreement or affirmation
2. a name of human bodily Student: play the kahoot.it
part
3. 3. A note by way of Resource: set up the link to
explanation added to a text jahoot.it
4. a relationship between https://create.kahoot.it/#user/29dc
words 78d6-82d5-49fe-9bd5-
c. Fill in the blank: 323a063e1c68/kahoots/created
Puppy:Dog::Kitten:____
1. Animal 2. Birds 3. Cat 4.
Human
d. Fill in the blank:
finger:hand::wheel:____
1.Tyer 2.Car 3. Door 4. Chair
e. Fill in the blank:
Bad:Terrible::Funny:___
1. Hilarious 2. Brilliant 3. Ugly
4. Awful
f. Which one of these pairs is an
example of analogy?
1. shovel:dig::fold:eat
2. flower:shovel::cat:dog
3. facebook:phone::bed:pillow
4. towel:light::dinner:food

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 12

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Reflection

When modifying the original lesson plan, the numbers of changes that needed to be
addressed to the lesson plan in order to fit the Australian standards and curriculum
outcomes, I found that the American Curriculum differs from Australian counterpart.
From what I have learnt throughout this semester, I noticed that the best pedagogy is not
simply just about teaching good content, but to also make sure to ‘know the content and
how to teach it’ by differentiating instruction to diverse students with different learning
styles, providing student-teacher learning as well as engaging students.

One of the important aspects that I focused in modifying is the use of ICT which seemed
to be lacking in the original lesson plan. The original lesson plan only incorporated pen,
paper and dictionary if applicable and I found that it is very out-dated and disengaging
and it needed to be changed. The Australian Professional Standards for Teaching (APST)
outlines the importance on utilizing ICT as to implement teaching that can expand
opportunities to students for their learning. In this regards, I have made improvements to
the original lesson plan to integrate more with ICT.

Overall, this assessment was more difficult than originally I thought it would. However, it
has helped me gain an idea of what our jobs will be as a future teacher once we finish our
degree and certainly prepared me knowledge to reach out all the students. Furthermore, it
allowed me to obtain deeper understanding of the Professional Standards and the Quality
Teaching Model.

Learning Outcome Method of measurement and recording

EN4-1A Responds to and composes texts for understanding,
interpretation, critical analysis, imaginative expression
and pleasure.
Identifies main ideas and obtains information in texts.
LXX4-2C
EN4-6C Identifies and explains connections between and among
texts.

WHS
This lesson is planned to take place in a traditional classroom, as such there are not
many significant risk issues that may appear. However, in language learning, it is
important that teachers provide students with safe and healthy learning environment
as to support students’ needs and competencies. When using ICT, teachers must
instruct them with safety and only allow them to use when needed. Teachers should
also tell them not to put their bags and smart device chargers in the walkway of the
classroom to avoid any hazards.

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 13

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

The following Standard Department of Education WHS policy (2013) objectives

apply including;
 Providing everyone with a safe and healthy working and environment;
 Supporting and promoting health and wellbeing;
 Promoting dignity and respect in classroom or in school;
 Providing appropriate information, training and instruction to facilitate safe
and productive learning environment.

Academic Justification

Although this original lesson plan being comprehensive, I found scope for

improvements with regards to the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

(AITSL, 2016) for differentiating the pedagogy for more or less capable students and

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).

Standard 1.5 which refers to differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning

needs of students across the full range of abilities.is addressed by the addition of the

Youtube clip that was simplified explanation of the ‘analogy’ with visual and audio clues

included for students allowing the original lesson plan’s usage of dictionary to reach out

to the students who are less capable. As for capable students, the lesson allows them to

work on the analogy sheet (see the appendix). Differentiated learning involves working

with students who demonstrate differences between their learning abilities, academic

levels, styles and learning preferences, thus requiring teachers to tailor instructions to

meet these needs (Bender as cited in Gentry, Sallie & Sanders, 2013). Differentiation

does not only occur in classroom level which I have focused in this lesson but also takes

many different forms such as streamed classes and selective schools (Millis et al., 2014).

When differentiating learning, it should be noted that teachers must not vary the learner

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 14

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

objectives or lower expectation for some students, rather must deliver the content by

varying methods to reach out (Algozzine & Anderson, 2007). Based on this, I reflect on

modifying the original lesson plan as they do not set out different objectives and aims,

but do provide alternative choices such as pair work, collaborating with the class to assist

their learning.

Secondly, the use of ICT (standard 2.6 and 4.5) was not seen in the original lesson

plan except for the use Internet dictionary, however, this aspect has been tackled by the

addition of YouTube clip (Learning upgrade, 2016), Google doc as well as a Kahoot quiz

to measure students’ understating at the end of the class (Nazilla0702, 2017). ICT is

considered as general capabilities (Australian Curriculum, 2017; NESA, 2017) and ICT

integration has shown some positive indications to increase students’ academic

achievement especially in English or language learning class (Floris, 2014; Ghasemi &

Hashemi, 2011) and in Australian classroom setting as to provide easy manipulation of

the content and fostering student-centered learning (Adam & Bruce, 2013). By limiting

ICT use primarily to class content use where applicable such as YouTube clip, Google

doc to collaborate students’ vocabulary knowledge and a kahoot quiz to test students’

understanding of the content, ICT is safely and effectively addressed in the modified

lesson plan. The use of ICT assists less capable students as it aids them to learn from

other students, through the repetition of knowledge and in scaffolded instructions.

Thirdly, modifications were made in the aspect of engagement and student

direction with regards to the NSW quality teaching model (Gore, 2007; Ludwig &Gore,

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 15

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

2003). In the original lesson plan, there is no evidence that students are engaging in the

class except in the beginning where students could actively voice their thoughts about

what analogy is. This standard was addressed by altering the individual tasks on creating

analogy from random words to pairing with the student who shares the same interest. It

has been noted that pair-work task benefits students more opportunities to speak and

engage in the content than group or whole class discussions (Achmad & Yusuf, 2014).

By altering this aspect of the lesson plan, more and more students who need extra

supports or who are less capable can feel confident to engage in their learning.

The final improvements were made to the lesson plan as to provide more students

direction. The teacher mainly led the original lesson and the words students can work on

were even prepared by teachers. This was altered by the options for students to choose

the words that they want to work with from the area or subject they are interested in and

this was changed from an individual work to a pair work in which students can find

someone with the same interests. It is believed that allowing students to make choices

within the direction of their learning has shown positive effect on their engagement and

creating enjoyable learning environment (Flowerday & Schraw, 2003). Furthermore, the

literature shows supporting students’ autonomy is highly effective as to promote their

learning efficiently (Reynolds & Symons, 2001). In this regard, standard was met for

students being able to pick on topic words to work on their analogy creations.

In conclusion, the original lesson plan provides the class opportunities to undergo

repetition in order to accommodate the learning content and help retention of knowledge .

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 16

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Due to the nature of original lesson plan being from America, it needed to be improved to

better fit the QT model as well as the APST standards. By modifying it, it is able to

address ICT, differentiated teaching strategies, engagement and student direction that will

enhance the classroom learning.

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 17

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Reference
Achmad, D., &Yusuf, Y. Q. (2014). Observing pair-work task in an English
speaking class. International Journal of Instruction, 7(1), 151-164. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1085253.pdf

Adam, B., & Bruce, W. (2013). ICT for ICT’s sake: secondary teachers’ views on
technology as a tool for teaching and learning. Australian Educational Computing, 28(1),
61-70. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=effective+use+of+ICT+in+education&pr=on&ff1=locAustralia&id
=EJ1018788

AITSL. (2016). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from

http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list

Algozzine, B., & Anderson, K. M. (2007). Tips for teaching: Differentiating

instruction to include all studnets, Preventing school failure: alternative education for
children and youth, 51(3), 49-54. doi: 10.3200/PSFL.51.3.49-54

Board of Studies NSW. (2016). Language K-10 framework. Retrieved from

http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabuses/syllabus-development/pdf_doc/2016-k-
10-languages-framework.pdf

Curriculum. (n.d.) Australian Curriculum. Retrieved from

http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/english/curriculum/f-10?layout=1#level7

Department of Education Work Health and Safety policy. (2013). Objectives –

policy statement. Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-
library/policies/work-health-and-safety-whs-policy

Floris, F. D. (2014). Using information and communication technology (ICT) to

enhance language teaching & learning: an interview with Dr. A. Gumawang Jati. TEFLIN
journal,25(2), 139-146. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=ICT+in+language+arts+&id=EJ1129406

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 18

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Flowerday, T., & Schraw, G. (2003). Effect of choice on cognitive and affective
engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(4), 207–215. doi:
10.1080/00220670309598810

Gentry, R., Sallie, A. P., & Sanders, C. A. (2013, Nov). Differentiated

instructional strategies to accommodate students with varying needs and learning styles.
Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=differentiated+learning+&id=ED545458

Ghasemi, B., & Hashemi, M. (2011). ICT: Newwave in English language

learning/teaching. Procedia social and behavioral sciences, 15, 3098-3102.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.252

Gore, J. (2007). Improving Pedagogy. In J. Butcher & L. McDonald (Eds.),

Making a difference: Challenges for teachers, teaching, and teacher education (pp. 15-
33). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Learning Upgrade. (2016, Jan). Analogies song [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r120aIfa_6s

Ludwig, J., & Gore, J. (2003). Quality Teaching in NSW Public Schools A
classroom practice guide Retrieved from
http://www.rqt.edu.au/files/5514/1774/9895/NSW_DET_2003-
Quality_Teaching_Guide.pdf

Mills, M., Monk, S., Keddie, A., Renshaw, P., Christie, P., Geelan, D., &
Gowlett, C. (2014). Differentiated learning: from policy to classroom. Oxford Review of
Education, 40(3), 331-348. doi:10.1080/03054985.2014.911725

Nazilla0702. (2017). Retrieved from https://play.kahoot.it/#/?quizId=fe3715c0-

30f2-4a75-9156-2f9ad8c59762

NESA. (2017). NSW Education Standards Authority. Integrating ICT capability.

Retrieved from http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/support-materials/integrating-ict/

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 19

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

NESA. (2012). English K-10 Syllabus. Retrieved from

http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/download/

Reynolds, P. L., & Symons, S. (2001). Motivational variables and children’s text
search. Journal of Education Psychology, 93(1), 14-22. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.14

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 20

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Appendix

This analogy worksheet was found from Teachnology. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.teach-nology.com/worksheets/language_arts/analogies/ana12.html

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 21

18798005 Nana Iwasaki

Learning Portfolio
http://iwasakinana.weebly.com

18798005 Nana Iwasaki 22