PGCE: Secondary English
Subject Studies Assignment:
Teaching ‘An Introduction to Poetry’
8,000 words
Submitted 4 February 2015
2
Contents
Introduction
3
Literature Review
5
Lesson One
10
Lesson Two
14
Lesson Three
18
Lesson Four
22
Reflections
25
Bibliography
27
Appendices:
29 - 43
Appendix 1(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson One
29
Appendix 1(b): PointPoint slides for Lesson One
31
Appendix 2(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Two
33
Appendix 2(b): PointPoint slides for Lesson Two
35
Appendix 3(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Three
37
Appendix 3(b): PointPoint slides for Lesson Three
39
Appendix 4(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Four
40
Appendix 4(b): PointPoint slides for Lesson Four
42
3
Introduction
This Subject Studies Assignment is based on my teaching of three one-hour and one fiftyminute long lessons to a Year Seven class (the lesson plans, associated PowerPoint slides and
resources where relevant can be found at Appendices 1 – 4). These four lessons will be the
first four in ‘An Introduction to Poetry’ scheme of work (the “SoW”). The scheme of work is
very flexible: there is no essential content and it is led by the teacher’s interests, the nature of
the class and the ability of the students. This is in line with OFSTED’s view that “[t]he most
effective lessons…showed the positive impact of enthusiastic teaching and well-chosen
activities” (2007, p.3). At the end of the scheme of work, there will be a reading assessment
where the students will have to analyse a poem and write a formal response. This seems a
brave decision, given the fairly popular view that “[c]ritical analysis has no place in poetry
lessons with children up to the age of about fourteen” (Benton, 1992, p.94). As the school is
very assessment focussed, my lessons need to take this into account: pupils will need to be
briefed about the assessment and I will need to “be clear about how assessment relates to
learning objectives. Pupils need to be clear, too.” (Cliff-Hodges, 2003, p.248). However, I am
nevertheless very keen that the pupils should enjoy my poetry lessons, as that will foster a
longer-lasting appreciation than just working to an assessment. As a way of fostering this
enjoyment, I intend that “the cultivation of individual and shared responses to the text”
(Benton and Fox, p.24) will be at the heart of these lessons.
The Year Seven class in question is a set three (of four) class with 24 pupils, although only a
small number are listed as having special educational needs. The class, like the school, is
made up almost entirely (
of
children, although none of the class are EAL.
Half the class are on Free School Meals, again representative of the school as a whole. Whilst
the class is mixed-gender, there are 18 more boys than girls. Looking at the trend within the
school, this is most likely linked to the fact that it is a low-ability set (on average, there are
more girls in the higher sets for English). This is also in line with national findings, as shown
by the
whereas just
GCSE English results:
of boys’ were (a
of girls’ English exams were graded A* to C,
attainment gap).
4
The school is a mixed comprehensive school for ages 11 - 18 in
. It became a
‘Outstanding’ by OFSTED since
, and has been rated
.
This context will need to be borne in mind throughout this scheme of work. It will affect both
what is taught (and how), as the “planning of poetry lessons needs to be as much concerned
with the audience as with the text” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.135). This awareness of context
must, however, be balanced with “the pedagogical principle of developing an approach where
the mode of teaching is consistent with the nature of the text.” (Gordon, 2014, p.21)
In order to monitor the pupils’ progress and learning during the SoW, three pupils will be
tracked both during the lessons through assessment of their class work, and after through
interview. The sample is intended to be representative of the class, both in ability and in
behaviour, in the hope that it will make the exercise more reliable. The three pupils are:
1.
level 5c at the start of Year 7 (the highest level in my class), is well behaved
in class but does not like contributing orally. She does not try as hard as she could:
she finds it easier to remain ‘under the radar’ of the class teacher.
2.
level 4a, is mostly well behaved, but does get distracted from his work easily
so does not fulfil his potential. His oral contributions are excellent, but his written
work does not match this. He is deemed to be a very low-level reader and is part of a
remedial reading plan for KS3 pupils at school.
3.
level 3a (the lowest level in my class), is quite poorly behaved in lessons and
often distracts other pupils. He does, however, work well with a high ability pupil in
the class next to whom he sits. His oral work is better than his written.
Extracts from interviews with these pupils will be included in my evaluation of each lesson to
support or challenge my self-reflection.
1
Its trustees are: Queen Mary, University of London, King's College London, University of East London,
University of Warwick, Catlin Group Limited, London Borough of Tower Hamlets and Tower Hamlets NHS.
5
Literature Review
Given the wealth of pedagogical literature about the teaching of poetry, I decided that this
should be the focus my reading. As a consequence, whilst it is an important part of my
teaching, I did not review any literature specifically on behaviour management. As one might
expect, however, behaviour management was addressed by much of the literature on teaching
of poetry; for example, Benton and Fox argue that:
“if groups are given a clear goal to achieve, a physical arrangement conducive to
discussion and the urgency of a time limit then…the teacher’s fears about timewasting, irrelevance or anarchy largely disappear” (1988, p.30).
The literature available on this subject can mostly be divided into two categories: first,
literature concerned with the practicalities of teaching poetry in a classroom, and second,
literature about the ideologies around teaching poetry in a classroom (the two primary, but
competing, theories being ‘reader response theory’ 2 and ‘New Criticism’ 3). The second
category (ideologies of teaching poetry) seems to be inseparable from discussion about the
nature of poetry; Rosenblatt (1978), one of the proponents of reader response theory, defines
a poem as being created “only when reader and text interact” (Benton, 1992, p.62). This SSA
is, however, focussed on the first category as, from a student teacher’s perspective,
discussions about critical theory often add little to the practicalities of teaching.
While there are many divergent approaches to the teaching of poetry, much of the criticism
on the subject seems to agree on two things:
1. “poetry is frequently neglected and poorly provided for” (Taylor, 2004, p.212) in
schools (especially in secondary schools – as made explicit by a report by OFSTED in
2007); and
2. while the teaching of poetry is central to the teaching of English, it is not something
you can do unless you enjoy it (Holbrook, 1961), and most teachers do not enjoy
poetry as much as prose.
2
Reader response theory came to being in the late 1960s and 1970s. It drew on I.A. Richards’ views on the
reading process. Stanley Fish, in his essay “Literature in the Reader” (1970), said that reader response theory
analysed the developing responses of the reader to the words on the page, as they succeed one another in time.
3
According to The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, New Criticism is “a calculated emptying out of
literary interpretation in order to highlight intrinsic artistic craft and form while ruling out such extrinsic matters
as morality, psychology and politics.” (2001, p.3)
6
The starting point, therefore, is relatively negative: teachers are struggling to teach poetry in
school because they are not sufficiently interested in it. The onus is firmly upon the teachers
not only to teach, but also to enjoy, poetry, as “much depends on the efforts of the teacher,
and their own deep engagement with the poems” (Gordon, 2014, p.127). This emphasis on
the teacher’s enjoyment of, and engagement with, the teaching of poetry is an interesting one.
It suggests that teachers need not enjoy, nor be engaged with, the teaching of other parts of
the curriculum, such as prose or non-fiction. It is also quite an elitist and divisive approach to
the teaching of poetry (exemplified by Benton’s view that “most English teachers find
reading fiction, watching film and television…more entertaining pursuits than reading verse”
(1992, p.85)).
A teacher who was not “taught by poetry enthusiasts” (Cliff-Hodges, 2003, p.238) and was
“aware of a background of hostility to poetry among…pupils” (Department of Education and
Science (the “DoE”), 1987, p.5) would probably, having read any pedagogy on the subject,
be pessimistic about their chances of successfully teaching poetry. The criticism sets the
barrier to teaching poetry well extremely high and links it inextricably to the breadth of
poetry that the teacher has been exposed to outside their teaching. Benton and Fox argue that
a poetry teacher must “read as many slim volumes of individual poets’ work as possible”
(1988, p.30). Hunt et al. from The English and Media Centre agree that the main reason for
unsatisfactory poetry teaching in school is that most teachers “do not read poetry for
pleasure” (1987, p.5). This poses the question: if you do not enjoy reading poetry, can you
still teach it?
This pressure on teachers to be more confident and able in poetry is not just about what they
choose for the pupils to read and their ability to discuss poems in the classroom; the DoE
claims that teachers “need to be sure in their judgements…and perhaps to be engaged in the
business of writing themselves” (1987, p.29). OFSTED agree with this view that teachers
struggle to critique pupils’ poetry properly because they cannot write poetry themselves: “too
many teachers…missed opportunities to improve pupils’ poetry writing through lack of
attention to redrafting” (2007, p.12). Hunt et al. also emphasise that teachers need to be
comfortable with encouraging useful redrafting in their poetry teaching, even going so far as
to say that it is “essential to make the whole process of drafting a natural part of work” (1987,
p.48).
7
The importance of pupil and teacher writing in poetry teacher is another area in which many
writers agree. Rosen is a key proponent of the importance of creative writing in the teaching
of poetry. He argues against the view that children must be taught poetic and narrative forms
and how to imitate them as the starting point to writing about poetry, suggesting that this
approach “denies the existential, cultural and ideological purposes of writing” (2004, p.196).
Rosen believes that, rather than teach poetic form and what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, teachers
should focus on helping pupils “to discover the purposes and uses of writing” (ibid.). The
DoE agrees that the approach in school needs to move away from the teaching of poetry
being an “apparently straightforward task of escorting pupils through a formidable barrier of
technical terms” (1987, p.212) and Taylor states that poetic techniques must “stem naturally
from the organic whole of the poem” (2004, p.214). Cliff-Hodges raises another problem
regarding teaching the more technical elements of poetry; she notes that teachers can become
complacent about such technicalities, as they are more sure of them than they are the about
the creative side of poetry. She therefore recommends that teachers “think about a concept
such as metaphor... [and] how [they] would define the word” (2003, p.252).
It seems that most writers agree that understanding of poetic techniques needs to be relegated
below appreciation of the poem. Having said this, Hunt et al. suggest that “left entirely to
their own devices, few pupils will freely and effectively experiment with form” (1987, p.41),
and New Critics might counter that “a wide range of desires might be satisfied by focussing
on how poems work” (Altieri, 2003, p.18). Pupils may be hesitant (and perhaps afraid) to
write a poem without an idea of where to start; providing a structure or form for them to use
can help them to realise that poetry is “just another form of writing which they have at their
disposal” (Hunt et al, 1987, p.47). This structure need not be a poem, but could be a picture
or other source for the pupils to draw on.
Rosen sees creative writing as linked to ownership and authorship. He believes that pupils’
creative writing in poetry lessons should be given a purpose and a place: not just a classroom
exercise, but something “wanted and loved” (2004, p.198). The DoE agrees and states that
the planning of teaching poetry needs to include thinking about how to present poetry in a
classroom, and that “much more could be done to give pupils the opportunity to assemble and
display their own choice of poems” (1987, p.19). Unfortunately, from a practical perspective,
this is not always achievable. Teachers may not have the opportunity to teach in subjectspecific classrooms or may share these classrooms (and the limited wall space) with other
8
subject teachers. ‘Display’ need not, however, be limited to the visual; pupils can also do
“public readings, dramatisations” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.31) and “a tape-recorder is an
indispensible aid” (ibid.) to providing an audience for pupils’ poetry work.
The importance of speaking and listening to poetry in the classroom is agreed upon by many
writers on the subject. Faust and Dressman see performance poetry in the classroom as the
future for its teaching, claiming that they “anticipate a future in which poetry reading will be
understood as a socially situated performance” (2009, p.130).
This emphasis upon performing poetry in a classroom is not unexpected, given that poetry
was historically a spoken art form: Homer’s Odyssey, one of the oldest extant poems, was
composed in an oral tradition and spoken, not written (Stanford, 1950). The speaking of
poetry can bring it to life in the classroom: it can “do for poetry what colour and line do for
paintings” (Altieri, 2003, p.83). Pupils should hear poetry read aloud (either by the teacher or
by fellow pupils and, according to Hunt et al., it is important for teachers to “give examples
of good dramatic readings” (1987, p.16)), as it allows them to “read with the ear as well as
the eye” (DoE, 1987, p.21). However, pupils must also be given the opportunity to speak and
perform poetry themselves, allowing them think about “meaning and the expression of
meaning” (Taylor, 2004 p.214). They experience “the power of alliteration, hear assonance,
rhyme and rhythm” (ibid.) for themselves. Cliff-Hodges agrees that performing and listening
to poetry facilitates students’ understanding of poetic techniques and form as, “[p]upils need
to understand what metaphor can do so that they can judge for themselves its impact” (2003,
p.252), and pupils come to this understanding through speaking and hearing those techniques.
This oral (and aural) element to teaching poetry is part of Benton and Fox’s belief that
“poems need to be experienced rather than explained” (1988, p.24). Oral work should
pervade a classroom in which poetry is being taught. Hunt et al. see talk in the classroom as
part of the process of demystifying poetry “without mediation from the teacher” (1987, p.26).
Talk around a topic is a way that pupils can access and relate to poetry and this “exploratory
talk by pupils has an important function in the process of learning.” (DoE, 1987, p.14)
The DoE links the speaking of poetry to the idea that (especially for younger pupils, such as
those at KS3) the focus in poetry lessons should be on breadth rather than depth, as “[p]upils
best exercise the auditory imagination by regular reading and listening to whole poems read
aloud” (1987, p.21). This idea was later echoed by OFTSED, who favoured a reader-
9
orientated approach to poetry teaching that “tends to combine extensive reading of many
poems with intensive reading of a few” (2007, p.127). Gordon agrees with this approach, but
sounds a note of caution that, in order to facilitate students’ learning, it is “important to
identify connections between poems” (2014, p.122). He believes that, unless these
connections are made, the teaching loses coherence. Hunt et al., however, think that this
breadth should be approached more loosely and that the “browsing lesson should be a regular
occasion for all classes” (1987, p.13). While this seems like a good way for pupils to enjoy
and talk about poems together, it may well be difficult to implement in one half-term of
poetry. As with all the ideas discussed, a careful balance will need to be struck.
10
Lesson One (see Appendix 1(a) for lesson plan and 1(b) for PowerPoint slides)
Aims
This lesson took a different approach to the example first lessons of the SoW on the school’s
system, which all focus on the question ‘what is poetry?’. I decided against such a lesson for
two reasons:
1. Any answer to this question suitable for a Year 7 class would be over-simplified and
misleading: it would be difficult to define what ‘poetry’ is, despite having studied it
at degree level and, as a teacher, you must “examine your own ideas first … how you
would define the word” (Cliff-Hodges, p.252), before teaching it.
2. Launching straight into form over content (taking a New Critical approach) and
meaning seems counter-intuitive. As Rosen states, the “primary task of a teacher of
writing for children … is not to induct into form.” (p.195).
In light of these points, this lesson covered a pair of Blake poems from Songs of Innocence
and Songs of Experience – The Lamb and The Tyger. The latter is one of Blake’s most
famous poems; the former is less well known. The rationale behind this choice was:
1. The animal imagery and the relative ease of comparison between them should engage
the
pupils.
2. Starting with classic poetry should help to redress the imbalance noted by OFSTED,
that “pupils had only limited experience of classic poems” (2007, p.3).
Dealing with two poems was inspired by the view that the preferred approach to poetry
teaching combines “extensive reading of many poems with intensive reading of a few” (Faust
and Dressman, p.127). Many writers believe that pupils at KS3 should experience a breadth
more often than depth of poetry.
The starter of this lesson - a brainstorm on what pupils could infer about the poems from their
titles (and images of the eponymous animals, as the class works well with images as stimuli)
- had a twofold purpose. It aimed to draw the pupils into the poems through anticipation
(Benton and Fox, 1988) and to elicit personal responses as the basis of the pupils’
11
understanding. The pupils were asked to jot down individually “what the title leads them to
expect of the poem” (Benton and Fox, p.137).
The class reacts well to images as stimuli, so they were given a prominent role in this lesson.
The pupils were shown Blake’s manuscript illustrations (as a progression from the starter),
and were asked to draw another image from each poem as part of their personal (written)
responses to them, an activity that was inspired by Benton and Fox’s idea that pupils “select
several ideas from a poem and…organise a collage” (1988, p.144).
Before the drawing activity, the poems were read aloud, so the pupils’ first contact with the
poem was aural. They also had copies of the poems so that they could follow visually if
desired. In doing this introduction it was important to “give examples of good dramatic
readings” (Hunt, Joyner and Stephens, p.16) to help the pupils access this poetry aurally.
The final activity aimed to use and solidify the pupils’ understanding of the main conceits in
the poems (animals as metaphors for innocence/experience or pre-/post-lapsarian man) by
asking them to decide what a selection of animals pictured on the board might represent. This
activity also had an extension for the HAPs in the class: to decide what the opposite ideas and
their accompanying animals might be. By drawing upon the pupils’ imagination at the end of
the lesson, the aim was that they relate to the Blake poems and realise that poetry can lend
“shape and meaning to our experiences” (Taylor, p.210), rather than being an irrelevant
literary device.
Throughout the lesson, the focus was on the pupils’ personal responses to the poems. This is
a step towards teaching pupils to understand meaning through their own responses, rather
than dictating a meaning to them: “pupils need time to…assimilate and ponder before being
plunged into…what the poem means” (DoE, p.6).
Evaluation
After the requisite silent reading, this lesson began by a pupil reading out the Learning
Objective, “To use inference to make sense of Blake’s two poems”. The class then used their
ideas to create a class definition of inference (“guessing using clues”). This exercise validated
the pupils’ ideas and understanding and set the tone for this sequence of poetry lessons: to
“give poetry back to its readers” (Benton, p.78). It also successfully introduced the pupils to a
new skill that they will need to develop for English.
12
The two-part starter to this lesson engaged the pupils from the off. First, the pupils responded
well to three Blake manuscript illustrations, vocalising their emotional responses in
comments such as that the drawings were “creepy”, “mad” and “religious”. Second, the
pupils were able to brainstorm what the titles The Lamb and The Tyger (each title with
associated visuals) made them think of. The pupils gave useful feedback, e.g that a lamb is
“soft” and “young”, whereas a tiger is “dangerous” and a “predator”. One boy even
recognised that the lamb was associated with religion and God. The use of images on the
IWB helped, as hoped, to give pupils a way into the poems; it put the pupils in “a receptive
mood” (Benton and Fox, p.135) for two difficult pieces of literature.
Including a PowerPoint slide and a short discussion about Blake’s manuscript illustrations
also helped to create the right conditions for learning. When asked about the use of the
manuscripts as introductions to the poems, the pupils agreed that it had both engaged them
and assisted their understanding:
Teacher:
Do you think it was interesting to see the fact that the poet had drawn
around his poems?
Erm, I think it was good to help us look at the poems.
Yeah, the pictures looked quite nice.
The use of two difficult poems in this lesson, which was a gamble given the pupils’ ability,
also paid off. The pupils enjoyed the challenge and agreed that a ‘What is Poetry?’ lesson
would have been less useful:
Teacher:
Did you think it was a good idea or a bad idea to start off doing two
poems? Would it have been better to do something, maybe, on what is
poetry?
I think it was OK, yeah.
Yeah, yeah...
Teacher:
So you don’t think you would have wanted a ‘what is poetry?’ lesson?
Would you have liked me to have done that with you?
Erm, no. I know what poetry is.
Erm, yep, we know what poetry is already.
13
The pupils worked well with these two poems (and with the poems in the rest of the SoW), as
they knew that it was “the responses of the pupils as they approach the poem” (Taylor, p.214)
that were central. This would not have been the case had we begun with a lesson which
prioritised poetic form and took a teacher-led approach; such a lesson would have felt
irrelevant to them, and may have been so given Rosen’s view that “[p]oets define poetry by
saying this is a poem” (2004, p.200).
14
Lesson Two (see Appendix 2(a) for lesson plan and 2(b) for PowerPoint slides)
Aims
This lesson focussed on T.S. Eliot’s Macavity: the Mystery Cat. The aim of using only one
poem was to introduce the pupils to a longer poem (and a different poem from Lesson One,
continuing the theme of breadth over depth) and to spend more time listening to and speaking
the poem in class.
Being about an animal, this poem linked to The Lamb and The Tyger, which provided pupils
with some continuity; as Gordon noted, to “facilitate students’ learning, it is important to
identify connections between poems” (2014, p.122). Also, its strong rhyme, metre and
humour make it effective to listen to. I wanted to take advantage of the idea that “children
bring an innate sense of rhythm to poetry” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.28) and to test the theory
that “the appeal of sound and rhythm is fundamental in sharing a poem with...children”
(ibid.). Despite being written for children, the language in this poem is challenging. It was
therefore the aim of this lesson that the sound of this poem would appeal to the pupils’
auditory imagination (as conjectured by Eliot himself in The Use of Poetry And The Use Of
Criticism, 1933), and that this in turn would help the pupils to understand and enjoy the poem
and the lesson.
The enjoyment element was key to the planning, especially as “[h]umour has always been an
important adjunct to...verse” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.79). Macavity is a poem that the
pupils should enjoy, both for its rhythm and sound and for its content. Additionally, as “the
planning of poetry lessons needs to be as much concerned with the audience as with the text”
(ibid., p.135), it was hoped that the idea of a master criminal cat would engage some of the
more difficult boys. Readers need lively imaginations, rhythmic understanding and to be
willing to suspend disbelief to enjoy this poem, and children are more likely to satisfy these
criteria than adults.
Listening to the poem was prioritised from the beginning of the lesson. As in Lesson One, the
pupils heard the poem first: a stanza from the poem was read aloud (which the pupils then
brainstormed about) and a recording of Michael Rosen reading the whole poem was played to
them twice. The brainstorm after the initial reading was the starter to the lesson, in line with
the view that “[p]oetry often needs to have its way prepared” (Hunt, Joyner and Stephens,
1987, p.28), and was intended to allow the pupils to talk and think around a stanza before
15
looking at the full the poem. Playing the Rosen recording twice allowed the pupils simply to
listen during the first reading and then focus on some questions I had given them during the
second. The pupils were not given the printed poem (as in Lesson One) as “for the first
hearing students should ... put pens down, and simply listen … they should have no access to
the poem in print.” (Gordon, 2014, p.19).
This lesson was intended to give pupils an appreciation for the whole poem through listening
to it, and allow them to practise focussing their comprehension and selecting relevant
information through answering four factual questions on the poem (e.g. “How is Macavity
described?”). While this was fairly simple analysis, it would be a step in the right direction
for the pupils’ end of term summative assessment (as mentioned in the introduction to this
SSA) and would get them thinking about how to do close reading.
Evaluation
This lesson proved to be one of the most successful lessons. The starter activity of reading
(and projecting on the IWB) one of the stanzas from the poem to the pupils and asking them
to brainstorm about the character of Macavity was very effective. It allowed the pupils to
work from their own personal responses first and acted as the necessary “preliminary
activity” (Hunt, Joyner and Stephens, 1987, p.28) that prepared the way for the pupils into the
poem. As with Lesson One’s starter activity, the pupils were engaged by the predictive
element (i.e. what/who do you think Macavity is?), and all were surprised to hear that
Macavity was not a man, but a cat. It also helped having the stanza on the IWB, as it focussed
the pupils’ reading and made the (individual) starter seem more communal. During the
feedback of their responses to the stanza this helped to draw “the response of the class
physically together” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.14).
After the starter the class interrogated the Learning Objective for the lesson, which was “To
use active listening and close reading to learn about Macavity”. Having successfully analysed
the Learning Objective with the last lesson, doing the same in this lesson helped them to
think about what “close reading” and “active listening” might be, and it seemed to be
successful. By doing this, and by encouraging the use of these skills throughout the lesson, I
was able to demonstrate to the pupils that “poetry is not a passive activity” (DoE, 1987, p.9)
and that they should “bring a careful and thoughtful attentiveness” (ibid.) to poems. The
16
pupils engaged with these skills in the lesson and were able to recall what they were in
interview:
Teacher:
Can you remember what close reading and active listening are?
Erm, well I know that active listening is when you are really listening
and you have to stay focussed and you’re alert...
Teacher:
Any ideas on close reading?
When you read carefully?
Having seen and read the single stanza in isolation, the pupils were then introduced to the
whole poem through the Michael Rosen recording. They listened to the reading once and then
were asked to think about three questions (one on each of repetition, rhyme and atmosphere)
during the second. This made them actively listen to the poem: the pupils sat in silence whilst
the recording was on and then gave thorough feedback on the three questions set. One boy
who is often disengaged in lessons was able to hear the rhyming scheme and guessed that the
rhyme he could hear was probably at the end of each line. The success of this activity
suggests that Benton and Fox were right that most poems “need to be read and heard more
than once ... to catch a sense of their rhythms and shapes” (1988, p.139).
The second part of the main activity was individual work on the four factual questions about
the poem. Most of the pupils, perhaps because they had had enough time to familiarise
themselves with the poem, concentrated on this activity and answered all of the questions.
The pupils were intrigued by the last question, “Where could Macavity be?”, as it was a bit of
a trick question, and enjoyed the answer, “Macavity’s not there”, seemingly evidencing the
fact that “Humour has always been an important adjunct to...verse” (Benton and Fox, 1988,
p.79).
Whilst all of the activities worked individually, and the pupils reacted well to hearing the
poem, perhaps the main reason for the pupils’ engagement in this lesson was the choice of
poem. It seems that the enjoyment factor is one of the most important in poetry lessons at
KS3: the pupils were at their most eloquent and enthused in the interview when discussing
Macavity:
Teacher:
Did you like Macavity: the Mystery Cat as a poem?
17
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yes.
Teacher:
What did you like about it?
Er, when he saw stuff and when the policemen are trying to find him...
Yes. It was very interesting and like first we thought he was a person
but when we found out he was a cat it was interesting.
Yeah, it was really mysterious and I liked the bit when it rhymed when
it said, like, ‘cos it sounded like, more like a chorus when that part
came again, “Macavity, Macavity”.
The pupils’ responses demonstrate that this is certainly a suitable KS3 poem and a good
poem to encourage pupils that poetry is something that they can take pleasure in. As
suggested by the pedagogy, the sound of the poem is clearly a crucial part of this (as noted by
it is true that “activities engendered in the classroom should bring the sound of poetry
to pupils’ ears” (Taylor, 2004, p.214). Additionally,
comment suggests that
prediction/reveal activities, such as the one in this lesson, work for pupils and help them to
invest in the poems.
18
Lesson Three (see Appendix 3(a) for lesson plan and 3(b) for PowerPoint slides)
Aims
The focus of this lesson remained on Macavity as it had engaged the pupils and suited them
as a class. This was clearly important as a “[w]ell judged selection of poetry is essential to the
success of poetry lessons” (Cliff-Hodges, 2003, p.244).
One of the focuses of this lesson was testing group work for the first time with the class, with
which there some problems: first, the classrooms are not set up for group work as they are
laid out in rows (and there is no changeover time between lessons, so lesson time is shortened
significantly if the layout is rearranged), and second, the class has discipline problems,
especially regarding low-level disruption, which group work could encourage. Whilst group
work can encourage independent thought and exploratory talk in lessons, it is important to
realise that it is “not a panacea” (DoE, 1987, p.18), especially if it is not a “familiar part of
work in English” (ibid.) for the pupils.
This lesson was, therefore, “carefully prepared and structured” (ibid.) to support the pupils in
their group work. To try and make group work more familiar to the pupils, the lesson was to
open with a discussion of how to behave during group work (and the outcomes of this
discussion noted on the board for the pupils to refer to). By focussing on the process of group
work at the start, the intention was that the pupils would realise that “listen[ing] to themselves
and each other and formulat[ing] questions” (OFSTED, 2007, p.121) in group work would
make them more “able to generate thoughtful, complex responses to poetry” (ibid.).
The lesson was planned such that after this discussion about group work, the starter activity
was actually work that the pupils could do individually and silently. This aimed to calm the
pupils down before they were thrown in the deep end of group work. The starter involved the
pupils creating a ‘wanted’ poster for the character of Macavity by drawing a picture of him,
writing a description of him and listing his crimes. This activity would build neatly on the
work that they did in Lesson Two (beginning to pick out what the poem tells us about the
character Macavity: they could use their answers from Lesson Two’s analysis) and would act
as a way for the students to “find their bearings” (Gordon, 2014, p.51) in the poem again,
before working on it further. While the pupils should have a wide experience of poetry, they
also require continuity throughout the SoW so as not to feel disorientated or overwhelmed in
19
lessons. As Gordon noted, “the path towards to expert teaching is about your own sensitivity
to opportunities for continuous learning” (2014, p.11).
The main activity of the lesson was group work: the pupils were to work together in threes or
fours to create a Crimewatch-style script about one of Macavity’s crimes, with selected
groups then performing them. This activity was introduced visually through showing a clip of
Crimewatch, helping pupils to get a sense of what the programme was about and could see it
‘in action’ (it was likely that most of the pupils would never have heard of Crimewatch, so
the cultural reference would be lost on them without an introduction). The aim was that using
the TV programme would act as a useful structural aid, as well as an inspiration for the
pupils, once they had seen the clip. After all, scaffolding for pupils’ written work on poetry
could be “photographs, films, etc, or first-hand experience” (Hunt, Joyner and Stephens,
1987, p.35), and in this instance a video clip should help to engage them in the task and give
them something to relate to.
Evaluation
This lesson began well: the pupils were pleased to be continuing with Macavity and
understood that spending another lesson on the poem helped to cement and progress their
learning:
I liked continuing with the poem.
I liked when we carried on with the poem ‘cos like you can recap again
and yer just y’know complete some extra bits ‘cos the poem is quite
long.
They were also receptive to the idea of creating a ‘wanted’ poster for him. They clearly
recognised that this task was born out of the nature of the poem – content and form were
linked explicitly – and this helped them to understand the task. This exercise supports
Gordon’s view that an essential “pedagogical principle [is] developing an approach where the
mode of teaching is consistent with the nature of the text” (2014, p.21). The pupils also
enjoyed the pictorial element to this task and integrated quotations and details from the poem
successfully into the poster: they appreciated the continuity that this starter activity afforded
them.
20
The next task – reimagining Macavity as a criminal in Crimewatch – also began promisingly.
The pupils responded well to, and were engaged by, the visual stimuli and related to the fact
that the task was related to something contemporary that they could see on television; the
pupils enjoyed the concept that poetry “can be connected with questions and concerns
students have in the context of their lives” (OFSTED, 2007, p.126-7).
Unfortunately, however, the pupils’ execution of this task was not as engaged or successful as
their conceptualisation of it. This was due not to the nature of the task, but to the form; the
pupils were very resistant to working in groups and a number were openly hostile to their
group members, refusing to work with them or assist with the task. Whilst Hunt, Joyner and
Stephens think that “group activity ... provides security and protection for pupils” (1987,
p.16), this was not the case in this lesson. The pupils were not secure in their group work and
were left exposed to their group members, rather than being protected.
According to the pupils, the reason that the group work did not work was due to the personnel
choices in the groups and the fact that the groups were not evenly sized (actually an
impossibility, given the number of pupils in the class):
Teacher:
OK, so how could I improve group work? How could I make it better
if I tried again?
Erm…
Same amount of people in one group, ‘cos we had, one group had three
people and we had four…
Teacher:
OK.
I think we should have like people that are at your right level, ‘cos then
you can like get on OK and be at the same pace and same level.
However, this is probably not the only reason. As Benton and Fox said about group work,
“[a] class unfamiliar with it will need to be trained” (1988, p.30), and this class were not
trained. The class teacher never does group work with them so they were unfamiliar with the
concept in English. This is something to bear in mind going forward as a teacher: pupils are
unlikely to ‘get’ group work from the off, but need practice in how to work co-operatively
and productively together. One pupil who was not present in the first half of the lesson
worked alone on the task and produced a good, on task, piece of work, whereas most of the
21
groups struggled to produce anything meaningful. This demonstrated how much more
comfortable they are working individually.
Surprisingly, the pupils did express enthusiasm about doing group work again, if it were
managed differently:
I do like group work
I do like it, it’s just that it was … ‘cos like not everyone was actually
participating.
The pupils comments on the group work suggest that the lesson could have been improved
had the groups been more carefully chosen, rather than based upon the seating plan for ease
and speed. This is something to take into account when working on teaching practice going
forward.
22
Lesson Four (see Appendix 4(a) for lesson plan and 4(b) for PowerPoint slides)
Aims
The final SSA lesson was planned directly in response to the difficulties faced in Lesson
Three. The fact that the pupils had not taken the group work seriously had had ramifications
for their behaviour and the conditions for learning in the classroom, and this needed to be
addressed in Lesson Four. The original intention was that all four SSA lessons would be
reader-response focussed, implementing “a methodology that is based upon informed
concepts of reading and response” (Benton, 1992, p.78). However, as it was necessary to
take a stricter approach in Lesson Four, this seemed an opportunity to try out New Critical
“ideas of comprehension and criticism” (ibid.). Additionally, as mentioned in the introduction
to this SSA, the pupils’ end of half-term test was to be a formal response to a poem (in itself,
an approach in line with New Criticism), and this lesson aimed to help the pupils to prepare
for this.
The lesson aimed to focus on learning poetic devices, identifying those devices in a poem and
then formally writing about a poetic device. The intention was that it would help the pupils to
understand, “how poems work before making uncomfortable claims about what they might
be saying” (Altieri, 2003, p.80). The lesson planned began with a test on poetic devices
(which could later be found in McGough’s U.S. Flies in Hamburgers): the pupils had five
minutes to learn the definitions before closing their books and completing a test on those
definitions. This starter went against a lot of the pedagogy reviewed, such as Lockward’s
thirteen principles for teaching poetry, which included the two principles: “[d]o not give tests
on poetry” and “[d]o not be overly concerned with techniques” (Lockward, 1994, p.65).
However, the hope was that this starter would (a) calm and focus the pupils after the overexcitement and lack of focus of Lesson Three, and (b) teach the pupils something tangible
quite quickly. Having completed the test, the pupils found examples of each device in the
poem and then focussed, and wrote a paragraph, on one of those devices using a heavily
scaffolded Point, Evidence and Explanation (“PEE”) structure.
While this lesson took a very different approach to the previous three, it aimed to retain some
sense of continuity in two ways: first, the poem was humorous and surprising (it was clear
that the pupils had enjoyed the comic element of Macavity, supporting Cliff-Hodges’ view
that “[p]upils often want their poems to be humorous and to entertain” (2003, p.248), and
23
making the right choices about which poems to teach was central to the SSA lesson
planning), and second, the pupils heard the poem read aloud before they read it, part of the
aim that “[r]eading aloud should be done often enough for it to cease to be a novelty” (Hunt,
Joyner and Stephens, 1987, p.16).
Evaluation
Surprisingly, the pupils enjoyed the lesson. All of the pupils interviewed agreed that the test
was a useful and engaging starter activity.
also picked up on the fact that the test
offered the pupils some immediate learning and gratification, which was one of the aims for
starting the lesson in this way:
Teacher:
What were your views on me giving you a test to start the lesson?
I liked that.
Yeah.
I thought it was good, yeah.
Teacher:
Everyone liked the test, wow!
Yeah, we learnt something while we were doing it.
In fact,
even went so far as to say that she would like to do more tests in poetry
lessons going forward:
Erm, I’d like tests … every week …
While this seems counter-intuitive, it is clear that when teaching poetry one must be mindful
of the class being taught, in terms of the pupils’ maturity and ability, supporting the idea that
the “planning of poetry lessons needs to be as much concerned with the audience as with the
text” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.135). The SSA lessons showed that the class in question are
currently uncomfortable when given a lot of independence and freedom in a lesson and prefer
the structure of a lesson like this.
The pupils also found it useful to start from the form and then to move on from there to
locating examples of those forms in the poem; they were at home with the New Critical
approach that children must be “shown poetic and narrative forms, inducted into learning
them and imitating them” (Rosen, 2004, p.196), despite the fact that Rosen views this
24
approach as denying the “existential, cultural and ideological purposes of writing” (ibid.). As
discussed above, this may be because the class is made up of pupils with quite low attainment
and mostly very low confidence. The plan for this lesson was too extensive, and there was not
time for them to write a PEE paragraph on one of the poetic devices employed. However,
their response to the rest of the lesson suggests that they may have found this activity useful
and engaging, challenging the view that “the formal criticism of a poem…has no place in
poetry lessons with children in the years before public examination courses” (Benton and
Fox, 1988, p.32).
Once again, the pupils also enjoyed the poem, which made them more receptive to its study,
supporting the view that a “[w]ell judged selection of poetry is essential to the success of
poetry lessons” (Cliff-Hodges, 2003, p.244); they were amused and engaged by idea that
hamburgers might be full of flies.
25
Reflection
Whilst some difficulties were encountered along the way, overall these SSA lessons were
successful in achieving their aims. From these difficulties and successes, there are a number
of points that will prove useful going forward to the teaching both of poetry and English more
generally:
1. While the choice of poems is usually the teacher’s (or the school’s), this choice must
be made with reference to the pupils being taught. The poems chosen for these SSA
lessons were all suitable for the class being taught, which was clear both during the
lessons and in the focus-group interview afterwards. A teacher should always be able
to “justify [their] choice” (Cliff-Hodges, 2003, p.244) in relation to the pupils in the
class.
2. It is essential to maintain continuity from one lesson to the next. The pupils
appreciated being orientated in their study and being able to transfer skills from one
lesson to the next. This can be especially challenging when teaching poetry: how can
the “teaching sequence maintain coherence even when the texts appear distinctive”
(Gordon, 2004, p.116)? It is important to draw links and comparisons between either
the poems or the skills employed to give the pupils a sense of direction and purpose.
3. Pupils enjoy being exposed to a wide variety of poems, rather than being asked to
focus on a select few; they respond well to breadth over depth and it does seem to
give them “a sense of themselves as readers of poems” (Benton, 1992, p.79) rather
than just as pupils to be taught.
4. Whilst group work can (and should) be used in the teaching of poetry, it “will not be
successful if it is not a familiar part of work” (DoE, 1987, p.18). Pupils need to be
able to practise this style of learning and it must also be very carefully prepared. The
teacher must pay careful attention before the lesson to the make-up of the groups and
their “physical arrangement” (Benton and Fox, 1988, p.30) within the classroom.
5. It is important, as in the last SSA lesson, to be flexible in the teaching of poetry and to
gauge what the class needs from each lesson after the last. The teacher must be able to
26
ascertain “when to make further demands, when to cut our losses, when to change
direction and when to bring work to a close” (Benton, 1988, p.88).
6. Finally, it is essential to take advantage of the pupils’ ‘auditory imagination’ when
teaching poetry. The pupils responded very positively both to hearing the poems read
and to reading the poems aloud themselves. The hearing and speaking of poetry seems
to play to the “‘imaginative conditions’” (Benton, 1988, p.85) within the pupils and
helps them to understand and appreciate poetry.
27
Bibliography
Altieri, C. (2003) Taking Lyrics Literally: Teaching Poetry in a Prose Culture in
Agathocleous, T and Dean, A.C. (eds.) Teaching Literature: A Companion, London: Palgrave
Macmillan Ltd.
Benton, M. (1992) Secondary Worlds: Literature and the Visual Arts, London: Open
University Press.
Benton, M. and Fox, G. (1988), Teaching literature: Nine to Fourteen, Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Cliff-Hodges, G. (2003), Possibilities with Poetry in Davison, J. and Dowson, J. (ed.)
Learning to Teach English in the Secondary School: A Companion to School Experience, 2nd
Ed, London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Department of Education and Science (1987), Teaching Poetry in the Secondary School: An
HMI view, London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office
Faust, M. and Dressman, M. (2009) ‘NCTE: The Other Tradition: Populist Perspectives on
Teaching Poetry, as published in the English Journal, 1912-2005’, English Education,
Vol.41, No.2, pp.114-134
Fish, S. (1970) ‘Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics’, New Literary History, Vol. 2,
No. 1, pp.123-162
Gordon, J (2014) A Pedagogy of Poetry Through the Poems of W.B. Yeats, London: Institute
of Education
Hunt, P., Joyner J., Stephens, J. (1987), The English Curriculum: Poetry Material for
Discussion, London: The English and Media Centre
Leitch, V.B. (2001) The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, London: W.W. Norton &
Co.
Lockward, D. (1994) ‘Poets on teaching poetry’, English Journal, Vol. 83, pp.65-70.
OFSTED (2007) Poetry in Schools: A survey of practice, 2006/7, London: OFSTED
Rosen, M. (2004), School students’ writing: some principles in Brindley, S. (ed.) Teaching
English, London: Open University Press
28
Stanford, W.B (1950), Introduction to The Odyssey of Homer, Vol I, London: Macmillan
Taylor, J (2004), Teaching poetry in the secondary school in Brindley, S. (ed.) Teaching
English, London: Open University Press
29
Appendix 1(a): Lesson plan for Lesson One
Lesson (and length): Introduction to Poetry
lesson 1 - Blake
NC/Framework Refs
• Literary heritage.
• Reading.
• Speaking and listening.
• Writing.
Date 7.1.14
Considerations to be borne in mind (prior
learning, context etc.)
• Pupils may have spent time on poems in
primary school, so they should have some
experience of the poetic form.
• Pupils came across some poetry in the
SoW that I did with them last term (An
Introduction to Shakespeare).
Resources
• PPT
• White board
• Copies of The Tyger and The Lamb
• Glue
• Pencils
Learning Outcomes
To use inference to make sense of Blake’s two
poems.
Success criteria/indicators
What will count as evidence that L’Os have
been achieved?
• All pupils will take thorough notes
throughout the lesson.
• Pupils will show that they have understood
some of the attributes of both a lamb and a
tiger, and what this might mean in relation
to innocence and experience through their
written answers to my questions.
• Pupils will show their learning through the
plenary; if they have understood the concept
they should be able to use their imagination
to create their own metaphors.
Sequence/timings of activities pupils’,
teacher’s)
• Silent reading – 5 mins.
• Set out expectations (get pupils to read
aloud) – 3 mins.
• Introduce what we are doing both in this
half term and in this lesson and get
reaction to some of Blake’s paintings – 3
mins.
• Write title, LO and date – 3 mins.
• What can the pupils tell about the poems
from the titles, The Lamb and The Tyger?
– 2 mins.
• What can pupils infer from the
illustrations? Does this change or confirm
what they think about the poems?
Pupil learning
• Pupils learn how to draw inferences from
pictures.
• Pupils practise how to predict things from
small amounts of information (another kind
of inference).
• Pupils learn to use their own personal
responses as a way into literature (e.g. using
what they understand about lambs to
understand Blake’s meaning).
• Pupils practise close reading.
• Pupils practise looking at the form and
rhyme of a poem.
• Pupils learn how to relate their own personal
ideas to wider ones.
• Pupils practise being creative by inventing
Year/class
Year 7, Set 3 (
)
30
[teacher hands out copies of poems and
glues] – 4 mins.
• Teacher reads poems aloud once and
picks pupils to read poems aloud for a
second time (one pupil per stanza) – 6
mins.
• Pupils respond to poems by answering
four questions, including one that asks
them to draw their own illustration for an
image in each poem [teacher hands out
pencils] – 10 mins.
• Get feedback from the pupils – 5 mins.
• Pupils work in pairs to work out which
poem is from songs of innocence and
which from songs of experience, why and
what this says about Blake’s view of
innocence and experience? – 6 mins.
• Feedback (and introduce idea of
metaphor) – 4 mins.
• Pupils create other animal metaphors and
opposites – 5 mins.
Differentiation
• I will differentiate using questioning
throughout the lesson.
• I will ask the more confident pupils to
read aloud, as the material is quite
difficult.
• I will assist pupils throughout the lesson
and thus differentiate as I go along (this
will be especially important when the
pupils are thinking about innocence and
experience.
their own metaphors.
Assessment opportunities
• I will assess the pupils throughout the lesson
using both questioning and by looking at
their work as they go along.
• I will assess pupils’ written answers to the
questions that I set after the lesson (I am
pushing for more writing and note-taking
during the lessons).
31
Appendix 1(b): PowerPoint slides for Lesson One
32
33
Appendix 2(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Two
Lesson (and length): SSA lesson 2 (poetry):
Macavity – The Mystery Cat.
Date 7.1.14
NC/Framework Refs
• Literary heritage.
• Speaking and listening.
• Reading.
Year/class
Year 7, set 3 (
Considerations to be borne in mind (prior
learning, context etc.)
• Pupils have just done a lesson on poetry (and
on poetry about an animal), so they should
be feeling more comfortable with this poem
than otherwise.
• Some of the vocabulary in Macavity is
challenging, but this should not hinder the
meaning of the poem.
Resources
• Copies of the poem (and table for pupils
to fill in – on the same sheet).
• Macavity wanted poster templates.
• Pencils.
Learning Outcomes
To use active listening and close reading to learn
about Macavity.
Success criteria/indicators
What will count as evidence that L’Os have
been achieved?
• Pupils will make notes about the poem on
their hearing it (i.e. they will actively listen
to the reading of the poem).
• Pupils will show that they can extract
information from a text when they create
their wanted posters.
• HAPs will show that they can not only get
a broad understanding of a text when
reading but can also select and retrieve
relevant information by quoting in their
posters.
Sequence/timings of activities pupils’, teacher’s)
• Silent reading – 5 mins.
• Read stanza from Macavity aloud to the
class. Explain unknown words – 3 mins.
• Pupils brainstorm ‘Macavity’; what have they
learnt about him from this stanza, what do
they think he is? – 3 mins.
• Pupils write down Title, LO and date – 3
mins.
• Pupils listen to Michael Rosen’s reading of
Macavity twice [while pupils listen, hand out
copies of Macavity, but they are not to look
Pupil learning
• Pupils learn how to make inferences from
what they read/hear and to draw
conclusions.
• Pupils practise active listening: engaging
with and responding to what they are
hearing.
• Pupils learn to draw out the sense of a
poem through hearing it (through it’s
rhyme, the word choices etc.).
• Pupils practise their close reading and
analysis skills.
)
34
•
•
•
•
at them!]. Pupils first just listen to the poem •
and then on second hearing note down
whether any parts of the poem are repeated
and which parts of the poem rhyme. After
both hearings, the pupils write down three
words to describe the poem. – 8 mins.
Pupils feedback what they heard and their
•
adjectives for the poem; these are written up
on the board and pupils add to their word
bank. – 5 mins.
Pick pupil to read the first stanza and then fill
in the table as a class in relation to this
stanza (to try and model what I want pupils
to do). Ask pupils to continue this work in
pairs for the rest of the poem. Go around
and explain any difficult words in the poem.
[while pupils do this, hand out wanted
poster templates] – 12 mins.
Pupils create a ‘wanted’ poster for Macavity:
drawing a picture of him and writing a
description both of him and his crimes. Pupils
should use quotations from the poem if they
can – 15 mins.
Pupils write a couple of sentences about why
T.S. Eliot might have decided that Macavity
should be a cat (what is a cat like; what is a
criminal like)? Extension task is that pupils
decide what sort of animal the detective
would be and why. – 5 mins.
Differentiation
• I am going to model an analysis of the first
stanza of the poem for the LAPs.
• I have asked pupils to use quotations from
the poem where possible, which should
challenge the HAPs.
• I will differentiate by outcome, both in
relation to their table and their posters.
• The plenary is both modelled and has an
extension task.
Pupils practise using a piece of literature
to feed their imagination; they also learn
that their personal response to literature
is important. In this respect, they also
learn that their imagination is connected
to their personal response.
Pupils practise speaking and listening skills
at the points of feedback (pupils also
practise their note-taking here too).
Assessment opportunities
• I will assess pupils throughout the lesson
both orally and in relation to their classwork (especially having pushed notetaking this term).
• I will later assess the pupils’ wanted
posters to check their understanding of
the description of Macavity in the poem.
35
Appendix 2(b): PowerPoint Slides for Lesson Two
36
37
38
Appendix 3(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Three
Lesson (and length): SSA poetry lesson 3
NC/Framework Refs
• Reading.
• Speaking and listening.
• Writing.
• Literary heritage.
Date 15.1/14
Year/class
Considerations to be borne in mind (prior learning,
context etc.)
• Pupils have already done one lesson on
Macavity and enjoyed it, so I wanted to build on
that lesson.
• Pupils performed poems in their last lesson with
the class teacher, so should be feeling slightly
more at home with speaking and listening than
sometimes.
Resources
• Copies of the poem Macavity: The
Mystery Cat.
• Wanted posters for Macavity.
Learning Outcomes
To use speaking and listening skills to show our
understanding of the poem.
Success criteria/indicators
What will count as evidence that L’Os
have been achieved?
• Pupils will create a wanted poster for
Macavity, using information from the
poem as the basis of the poster.
• Pupils will work in groups to complete
a task.
• Pupils will produce a script for their
own version of Crimewatch.
Sequence/timings of activities pupils’, teacher’s)
• Silent reading [teacher hands out wanted
posters and glues] – 5 mins.
• Pupils write down title, date, LO – 3 mins.
• Pupils read the poem aloud (teacher picks
students to read stanzas) – 5 mins.
• Pupils complete their wanted posters, using the
information in the poem and the information
that they selected from the poem last lesson –
10 mins.
• Pupils feedback on the crimes in the poem;
teacher gets pupils to underline the crimes - 3
mins.
• Pupils watch example of Crimewatch – 1 min.
• Teacher asks pupils what information was
included (e.g. what the crime was, what the
criminals look like etc); teacher writes this up on
board. – 3 mins.
• Teacher explains task – 3 mins.
• Pupils work in groups of 4 (in their rows) and
Pupil learning
• Pupils practise public reading and
active listening (a skill that was
introduced to them last lesson).
• Pupils consolidate their learning from
last lesson and learn to apply it to their
work.
• Pupils learn how to use creative
writing for a different genre
(detective/crime).
• Pupils think about how best to present
information in a new way: information
from a poem as a Crimewatch style
program.
• Pupils practise group work, which they
don’t get to do often.
• Pupils practise speaking and listening
and their presentation skills.
39
•
prepare a Crimewatch script for Macavity, using
the prompts on the IWB and the prompts on the
board. – 20 mins.
Teacher chooses groups to present their
Crimewatch script to the rest of the class (each
presentation is preceded by a clip of the
Crimewatch theme tune); [teacher should have
assessed the groups prior to asking them to
present]. – 8 mins.
Differentiation
• I will try and sit the pupils so as to maximise
their strengths; I hope that the stronger
speakers will carry the group in the presentation
exercise and the stronger writers will help write
up the script.
• I will assist pupils throughout the lesson and try
to differentiate like that.
• I will differentiate by outcome, both in relation
to their wanted poster and their presentation.
Assessment opportunities
• I will assess pupils throughout the
lesson, in terms of both their oral and
their written contribution to the class.
• I will assess their speaking and
listening/presentation skills as well as
their writing skills through their
presentations.
40
Appendix 3(b): PowerPoint Slides for Lesson 3
41
Appendix 4(a): Lesson Plan for Lesson Four
Lesson (and length): poetry lesson 4 (writing
and analysis focus) - 50 mins.
NC/Framework Refs
• Reading.
• Writing.
Date 16.1.15
Considerations to be borne in mind (prior
learning, context etc.)
• Pupils misbehaved in their lesson
yesterday and did not take advantage of
the opportunity to do fun group work.
Therefore, I want them to do a lot of
silent, individual writing today.
• Pupils should have some understanding of
poetic devices already.
Resources
• Copies of McGough’s poem U.S. Flies in
Hamburgers.
• PPT.
• Glues.
• Pieces of lined paper for the test.
• Green pens.
• IL maps.
Learning Outcomes
To identify and analyse poetic techniques in
McGough’s poem.
Success criteria/indicators
What will count as evidence that L’Os have
been achieved?
• Pupils will show that they have learnt the
poetic devices in the poem by completing
the test set for them.
• Pupils will write PEE paragraphs about the
poetic devices in the poem to show that they
have understood the effect of devices.
• Pupils will work independently.
Sequence/timings of activities pupils’,
teacher’s)
• Silent reading – 5 mins.
• Pupils copy down table of devices and
definitions - 5 mins.
• Teacher tells pupils to learn these devices
and definitions off as they will be tested
on them in a minute (teacher hands out
test paper) – 4 mins.
• Pupils told to close their books and
complete a test on the devices (teacher
hands out green pens) – 4 mins.
• Pupils swap test papers with the person
next to them and mark with green pens –
3 mins.
• Pupils write down Title, LO and date – 3
mins (teacher hands out poems).
• Teacher reads out poem to the class – 3
mins.
• Pupils read through the poem themselves,
selecting, underlining and labelling
Pupil learning
• Pupils will learn (or revise) a number of
poetic techniques.
• Pupils will practise spotting poetic
techniques in a poem.
• Pupils will learn how to analyse those
techniques and their effect.
• Pupils will practise their writing.
Year/class
42
relevant examples of poetic devices – 7
mins.
• Teacher models PEE paragraph about
poetic devices on the IWB – 3 mins.
• Pupils write a PEE paragraph about each
device in their books (teacher hands out
IL maps) – 20 mins.
• Students have a sticking in session.
Teacher tells them to do activity 5 on the
IL map for next lesson and explains just
that acivity – 5 mins.
Differentiation
• The test is differentiated by outcome.
• I have devised an extension task for the
pupils to work on in their close reading
exercise.
• The writing task is modelled on the IWB
for the pupils and is colour coded so that
they can use the model and apply it to
their work.
Assessment opportunities
• The pupils will peer assess their work and
therefore learn from one another.
• I will assess the pupils formally through the
test and through their PEE paragraphs.
• I will assess the pupils throughout the lesson
as they work.
43
Appendix 4(b): PowerPoint slides for Lesson Four
44