SECONDARY LESSON PLAN

YEAR LEVEL & SUBJECT: year 7 maths

DATE: 7/4/15

NO. OF STUDENTS: 35

LESSON DURATION: 30 mins

TOPIC/FOCUS: Understanding size of fractions

AusVELS/VCE STATEMENTS:
Compare fractions using equivalence. Locate and represent positive and negative fractions and mixed numbers on a number line (ACMNA152)
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (INCLUDE LINK TO AusVELS/VCE):
The students will be able to:
-demonstrate an understanding of fractions and their size using a variety of methods (area model, linear/length model, set model, benchmarking and conceptual reasoning).
-explain, with the use of examples, what benchmarking and conceptual reasoning are.
SUMMARY OF RESOURCES REQUIRED:
-fraction cards, instruction card, poster paper, pencils and textas (if students need).
LESSON PROCEDURE

TIMING

RESOURCES

STEPS OF THE LESSON

Opening:
Discussion on fractions to link current
lesson to previous lesson(s).

Lesson Development:
Students are to pair off (groups of three
are okay) and are given fraction cards
and an instruction card in their
pairs/groups.

EXPECTED STUDENT RESPONSES

Students to contribute to
discussion on fractions,
discussion is student lead with
one student writing all relevant
answers and comments on the
white board.
Students to read the card and
work on what it asks (card asks
them to place the fractions in
order from smallest to largest,
effectively placing them on an
imaginary number line).

TEACHER RESPONSES TO
STUDENTS

GOALS & METHODS OF EVALUATION

Teacher to scaffold conversation

and ask prompting questions
where necessary. Teacher to also
instruct when something should
be written on the board.
Teacher does not give verbal
instruction, simply to walk
around and question in order to
promote understanding, how
did you know A > B? What
knowledge did you use in order
to do that?, etc.

Compare fractions using equivalence.

Locate and represent positive and
negative fractions and mixed numbers on
a number line (ACMNA152)

Students are then to pick pairs of

fractions to compare and present in a
model (area, linear or set).

Students to explain to their

pair/group why the model they
chose is or isnt good for
representing whether fraction A
is smaller or larger than fraction
B.

Teacher to walk around, asking

questions and correct slight
misunderstandings as they go,
why did you choose those? Is
that really the best
model/fraction pair for that?

They are then told to pick either the set,

area or linear model that they created
and put it on a poster explaining
a) What fractions they are
comparing
b) What model they are using and
why.
They can choose to show a correct
example of the models or an incorrect
one (if the latter they must express why
what they did was wrong).
Closure
Discussion: from the task today what do
you think benchmarking and conceptual
reasoning are?

Students to work independently

on posters, however on topic
discussion is allowed in order to
promote reasoning and
understanding of concepts.

Teacher to walk around, asking

questions and correct slight
misunderstandings as they go.

To be collected at the end as a form of

formative assessment.

Students to explore tasks and

ultimately realise what
benchmarking and conceptual
reasoning is (as described in
overview).

Prompt and question when

necessary.

Explain, with the use of examples, what

benchmarking and conceptual reasoning
are.

Students to hand in posters at the end

of class.

Demonstrate an understanding of
fractions and their size using a variety of
methods.

OVERVIEW:
*See appendix 1 for formal lesson plan with AusVELS statements, goals, timing, etc. This overview will rely heavily on the information in appendix 1 and 2 (personal poster)
to form an overview of the lesson.
YEAR LEVEL/AusVELS/RESOURCES:
*see appendix 1.

MISSION STATEMENT:
The task set to us was to first place fractions from smallest to largest and then compare pairs of fractions using appropriate models (see appendix 1). The purpose of this
lesson was to allow the students (us) to understand on what benchmarking and conceptual reasoning skills are within the context of fraction sizes and places upon a
number line. By the end of the lesson we as the students were able to describe benchmarking as comparing fractions to a known fraction in order to understand their size
(i.e. 14/30<1/2, 13/24>1/2, therefore 13/24>14/30) and we understood conceptual reasoning to be similar to benchmarking however with more focus on the numerator
and denominator (i.e. 3/8 and 3/10, numerator the same but denominator different, 1/10 has more parts than 1/8, therefore 3/8>3/10).

PRIOR KNOWLEDGE:
It is also good to note that this was achieved by testing the knowledge of fraction models and previous fraction work such as multiples, common denominators, etc.

METHOD:
*for step by step instructions see appendix 1.
This lesson was mainly student driven. Jill didnt give any explicit instruction as the card told the students what to do. This allowed students to deconstruct the question,
reason through the task and reach their own conclusions, with minimal help at all apart from the discussions going on in pairs/groups.

COMMON ERRORS:
The poster task allowed us to explore either correct or incorrect approaches to fraction models and comparisons. In my case I chose to explore the latter (see appendix 2).
Common misconceptions within fraction models include things like drawing linear models with increasing parts (e.g. 1/8, 2/8, 3/8.) instead of equal parts (1/8, 1/8, 1/8),
as I explored, incorrect drawing of area models and incorrect comparison within set models. As I showed with my poster (see appendix 2), and linear model is a great way
to explore conceptual reasoning as it shows how fractions with the same numerator are vastly different depending on the denominator, however it is also an easy way to
make silly mathematical mistakes.