Education Theories Instructional Presentation And Follow-Up

Education Theories: Instructional Presentation And Follow-Up

A. Need for Lesson Pacing

According to the Research Literature on time management, Lesson pacing is needed to enable both the teacher and the students to cover more content. This is so because lesson pacing stimulates students’ attentiveness and participation during lessons.

Regan (2003), in her opinions highlights that pacing is needed to break to break the monotony during lesson time. This can be enhanced if the teacher incorporates various activities during the course of the lesson. For instance, allowing brainstorming sessions.

Lesson pacing is needed by majority students to at complexity levels of the lesson. This will help the student to understand clearly the contents being studied (Hofmeister & Lubke, 1999, p. 19).

According to the Least Restrictive Behavioral Interventions (LRBI) checklist (2006), brisk pacing enhances student attention and at the same time increases the number of response opportunities-two factors that are associated with increased learning.

B. Differences in Lesson Pacing

Pacing in a class of ELL students is likely to be conducted with more modifications that are geared towards helping the English leaner students. Okumbe and Tsekho (2008) note that in order to address the needs of these special learners, accommodations and modifications in the testing and lesson pacing procedure is important. Modifications such as extending the time limit for the offered quizzes and the increased individual interaction of the teacher with the ELL students are vital in ensuring the students are at par with the pace of the lesson. The teacher can also use more tests with fewer multiple choices as opposed to longer tests with more multiple choices as may be in the class without ELL students. As a result of the above, pacing is likely to be slower as compared with a class without ELL students.

On the other hand, pacing is likely to be conducted with fewer modifications for a class without ELL students. This is because their understanding and response rates will be high. A teacher can decide to provide more tests with longer multiple choices and reduce the time limit on quizzes offered during the lesson, say from 4 minutes to 2 minutes for the tests (Oregon, 2003). A teacher of a class of without ELL students has a high chance of finishing the syllabus halfway the term as compared to one with ELL students. Even so and as Berliner opines “it is the variability across classes that is more impressive … [for instance, a] teacher adjusts the pace in the workplace and covers half the text in a semester; another finishes it all” (Hofmeister & Lubke, 1999, p.50).

C. Complexity of Lesson Content on Lesson Pacing With ELL Students

Wyne et al, Hofmeister and Lubke (1999) emphasize material that is too difficult or presented poorly cannot be learned at any instructional pace (p.20). As such, the complexity of lesson content will make it impossible for lesson pacing to be effected at any instructional pace. This is because, the teacher, on checking the complexity of the learning material, he/she will find that the ELL students lack the necessary skill to grasp the concepts at hand. In this situation, the teacher will find it difficult to apply any instructional pace.

Alternatively, if the teacher makes up a decision to teach the complex content to a class with ELL students, the rate of lesson pacing will greatly reduce. This will be so because the teacher will be required to avail a considerable amount of time the ELL students in order to interact with the complex content. The teacher in this will also be required to extend the time limit on quizzes or repeat the concepts in the succeeding lesson to enable the students get a better understanding of the complex content (Okumbe Tsekho, 2008)

References

Hofmeister, A., & Lubke, M. (1999). Research into practice: Implementing effective teaching strategies (3rd ed.). Logan, UT: Utah State University.

Least Restrictive Behavioral Interventions (LRBI) checklist. (2006). Instructional pacing. Retrieved on February 28, 2011, from; LRBI Info-Base.

Okumbe M.A. & Tsheko G.N (2008).The need for curriculum modifications for special needs learners in Botswana Harare: University of Botswana

Oregon, L Teaching Tip 18: Pacing.