Running head: PROPOSAL

Teaching Clauses: A Proposal

Robert Beck
Capital University

Running head: PROPOSAL

2

Abstract
Modern readers and writers understand that language is evolving. This is the natural progression
of oration and is to be expected. This evolution is not limited to oral language. Modern written
language is also progressing. Languages evolve and grow, but there are still rules that should be
enforced to maintain proper order. Language, especially English, is immensely complex and as
such needs rules for readers, writers and audiences. These rules are necessary to allow the
intended message of the writer or orator to be passed to the audience. If there is not clear writing
the audience cannot understand the message. To prevent misunderstandings grammar must be
taught effectively. I propose a lesson that will help writers and audiences alike. When taught,
students who partake in my proposed lesson will obtain skills to clarify their writing. With this
clarification the students can become more effective writers. There will be a certain set of
challenges in writing this lesson. This proposal will addresses these challenges and argue why
they are worth attempting to overcome.

Running head: PROPOSAL

3

Teaching Clauses: A Proposal

Introduction
Writing is an essential means of communication for both intimate relationships and
professional careers. For a person to be truly successful in his personal life and his professional
life he must be an effective communicator. As such, to be successful a person must be an
effective writer. I intend to create a lesson teaching effective writing skills. Common core agrees
with this and places this into its standards. Common core for grades 9-10, 1-c declares students
must:
Use words, phrases, and clauses to link the major sections of the text, create cohesion,
and clarify the relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and
evidence, and between claim(s) and counterclaims.
This lesson proposed will meet this standard and as such allow students to improve their writing.
Reasoning
While it is both self-evident that writing is essential to communication and expression of
knowledge, writing has also been deemed necessary by the national standards of common core.
Students must meet this standards to graduate. By meeting the standard that I will be teaching
students will: achieve better communication skills allowing them to be more successful in both
writing and understanding others writing, become more critical learners and thinkers, and
achieve state and national goals that will make them successful students.

Running head: PROPOSAL

4

The nature of the lesson is to teach towards the common core goal. In the goal the words
clarify and relationship exemplify my purpose. The goal states that words, phrases, and
clauses must be used to clarify the relationship between claims and reasons. (Common Core
9-10.1-C) To do this I will teach a lesson on different clauses in the English language. The lesson
will have aspects of other Core standards, but will primarily be for 9-10.1-C.
The clauses taught will clarify the relationship between claims and reasons as
addressed in standard 9-10.1-C. This will lead students to be more critical thinkers. They will
better understand how claims are made, how they argued and proved or disproved. With this
understanding students will have the ability not only understand argument but also make
effective argument. They will make more logical claims with clauses and word play. As such
they will be better communicators and better understand others communication.
Challenges
There is a set of challenges that will come from writing this lesson. Some are natural to
all lesson planning, explicitness, congruity, diversity and specificity. Those are writing
challenges and can be addressed with little pedagogical knowledge. The specific challenges for
this lesson all involve pedagogical knowledge. Addressing different learning modalities and
differentiation in testing this specific lesson will be a challenge.
The major challenge for the writer of a lesson plan is explicitness. A lesson plan should
be clear enough that any qualified teacher could follow its instructions and teach the lesson. As
such this will be my main difficulty. This is a difficulty though that is worth attempting. This
difficulty is standard for many professional documents. Writers of a syllabus would have this
same problem, as would a memo writer, a manual writer or the writer of an informative article.

Running head: PROPOSAL

5

Clear writing is essential in all aspects of communication. An irony considering the lessons
subject, again enforcing the reasoning for this lesson.
Congruity in this lesson plan is similar to explicitness. It is essential in teaching a lesson
that all goals of the lesson are aimed at the ultimate goal or message. Each activity, lecture and
test must be congruent in their goal. If they do not correspond then the lesson will not be
effective. A lesson cannot be taught without congruency. Lessons must have a central goal or
aim. This is also standard in professional documents. If the goal is not addressed in each section
then the goal cannot be reached. This is a writing challenge. The author of a document must
write both deliberately and minimally to avoid digression.
The lesson plan has unique authorial challenges. Lesson plans must be student centered,
multifaceted documents that address students with different learning styles and disabilities. Each
student is unique. Expressing this in a readable and practicable form is the challenge.
Differentiation is not a difficult thing to implement, as much as it is a difficult thing to describe.
This problem is a good exorcise in explicitness. Direct and intentional wording can solve this
problem, which was addressed earlier as a problem for documents such as a lesson plan.
Constraints
The lesson plan is constrained on many levels. Language must be appropriate for its
intended audience, other teachers. The lesson plan is a document to be used to, well, teach a
lesson. The language must reflect that. This is not a major constraint as professional language is
often the best to write in. The main constraint of language involves the language of the lesson
itself. The lesson taught must be taught at the appropriate level of the students. When the lesson
itself is implemented the language of the lesson must be appropriate for students. The constraints

Running head: PROPOSAL

6

of language of this document are relevancy and appropriateness. Language used must be both
professional scholarly language and relatable to the students. This language must be written into
the document and then reflected in the lesson itself.
The constraint of time will be an issue. The lesson will take place during a fifty-five
minute time slot. As such it must be completed adequately during this period. This is a time
constraint but it is an average amount of time for a class period to be. It will be difficult to
complete an entire lesson in this amount of time. This can be overcome through proper planning,
instruction, and clear, precise writing. What is important to remember concerning a lesson plan is
its relation to the unit plan. With the unit plan in place, a lesson plan can be implemented in this
period of time, for there will be more days to teach other material. The lesson plan is essential to
the unit plan, which is essential to reaching standard goals. The lesson plan must be enacted
properly to teach its intended goal.
Timeline
The lesson plan will not take a significant amount of time to write. The objective has
already been determined. The majority of time spent will be on differentiation. This though, will
still only take a matter of hours. Preparing to write a lesson plan is the longest step in writing a
lesson plan. As it is a lesson plan it will be written to take only one day to teach. The timeline
will be short. I will be writing the lesson for a fifty-five minute time slot. It will correspond to a
greater unit plan. The lesson plan is intended to be used alongside other lessons in the unit to
achieve the aimed goals.
The lesson will begin with an anticipatory set. This will introduce the lesson. The lesson
plan will follow a pre-developed model; in which an introduction is given, then the students are

Running head: PROPOSAL

7

told what will be taught. The lesson will be taught following this. The students, in this model,
need to know what they are learning before it is taught. This will only take fifteen minutes of the
time slot. The remainder of the time will be spent on the lesson, group work/testing. The lecture
and visual aspect of the lesson will take thirty minutes. Then the students will be placed into
groups and complete a worksheet of the lessons topic. This will take ten minutes. In total all
fifty-five minutes will be used. There is extra allotted time in the lecture slot of the lesson for
questions.
Conclusion
The proposed lesson serves an important purpose. It will be an essential part of a
students growth. The risks of this proposal are minimal. Of course, there is a chance that the
lesson may not work and as such will be a waste. That is risk that needs to be taken. For students
to prosper they must take risks. As such teachers must take risks also. A teachers risk is much
smaller, its also much more educated. The risk of this lesson failing is small but it is there. It is
minimalized by the following of a guide, a guide developed by an expert in student development.
Its goal is not created by its author but instead by the state. The risk is also minimalized by
preparation and implementation. The document will be more than adequately prepared. It will be
implemented as it was written. As it is a new lesson, it may not go as planned. As long as the
document is written clear enough to allow for flexibility this will not be a problem. The lesson
plan will succeed ultimately because of the ability of its author.