UTL 640E Lesson Plan

UTL 640E
Meredith Lawrence/Round Rock High School

Lauren Gonzaba
English IVSeniors

Date: 10/14/14
8th period (2:38-4:08)

Lesson #2
Teach #2

Lesson Objectives:

Students will continue to read Twelve Angry Men as a class while verbally answering questions
throughout the play, answering at least one question each, in order to promote understanding
of morally ambiguous characters.

Resources/Materials:

To Do

Re-read play
Generate questions to check for understanding and promote critical thinking (attached
at end of lesson plan)

For the Lesson

Move desks into two rows facing each other

Ensure each student picks up a copy of the play before they sit down

TEKS and Student Expectations:

English IV
(5) Reading/Comprehension of Literary Text/Fiction. Students understand, make
inferences and draw conclusions about the structure and elements of fiction and
provide evidence from text to support their understanding. Students are expected to:
(B) analyze how authors develop complex yet believable characters in works of
fiction through a range of literary devices, including character foils

Steps in Lesson:

Engagement
1. Students will each take a copy of Twelve Angry Men as they come into the classroom.
2. Once everyone has a script, ask students what has happened so far in the play.
3. After students memories have been refreshed, ask for 12 volunteers to read the parts
of the 12 jurors in the play.
Students who did not read last week will have a role this week
This is a small class, so I know who read last week and who did not
Briefly introduce each juror as you ask for a volunteer, so students are reminded
of the jurors personalities.

Have students with speaking parts make name plates with their juror number to
place on their desks.
4. Transition into reading the play.
Note: This introduction and casting will take about 10 minutes.

Stated Objective
We will continue reading Twelve Angry Men as a class and stop periodically throughout
the play so we can ensure everyone understands the story, as well as discuss when
morally ambiguous characters present themselves.

Active Learning
1. The 12 students acting in the play will read their parts as they come up.
Students may move around in order to get into character.
Students will perform some of the main blocking parts noted within the
play as they act out their role as well as read it.
o i.e. particular jurors are directed to pace as they talk, light their
cigar, or blow their nose.
This also helps keep students active and engaged.
The remaining 8 students will also sit around the jury conference table.
These students are following along with the play and are ready to
answer questions when asked.
2. Throughout the play, stop and ask the students to repeat what just happened in the play
This will usually occur when something important to the plot occurs
If the same people continue to answer these questions, call on the students
who have not answered at all
Students who are remaining quiet can also be asked to repeat what
another student has answered, so they may demonstrate that they are
paying attention.
3. Ask students where they can start seeing morally ambiguous characters.
Ask students to explain why these characters seem morally ambiguous.
These students will either answer voluntarily or be called upon.
o Same method as described above
4. Note: Reading the rest of the play and answering questions will take about 50 minutes.
5. Note: All these questions listed at end of lesson plan

Closure
1. Once the students have finished reading the play, ask them again if there were any
characters they saw as morally ambiguous; ask them what textual evidence could prove
their theories correct. Remind students that their character analysis essay is based on
morally ambiguous characters within the play. Suggest that the students take notes
about the character they are considering analyzing when they read the play again on
their own.

Modifications/Differentiation Strategies:

Following the IEPs

Evaluation Strategies:

The students will be asked questions throughout the play (about the plot and potentially
morally ambiguous characters) to check for comprehension and encourage critical
thinking. I will observe and make note of those who answer the questions, and ensure
everyone has a chance to demonstrate understanding before moving on with reading the
play.

Notes/Recommendations for next time:

Be sure to redirect the students having side conversations next time. For future
reference when teaching students vocabulary, have them repeat back the definition in
their own words.

Questions
1. Who can tell me what evidence has been provided for us so far?
a. Make sure students mention the knife (Juror 8 bought the same one), the old mans
testimony (hearing Im gonna kill you! and the body hit the floor), and the boys
record of knife-fighting, reform school, and fathers abuse
2. Who are our main characters right now? What are some key characteristics about them?
a. Make sure students mention Juror 8, Juror 3, Juror 7, and Juror 10
i. Remember Juror 3s short aside about his own son
3. Can anyone reiterate what Mrs. Lawrence just described as a morally ambiguous character?
a. Have we started to see some of these characters show up in the play?
i. Distinguish that Juror 8s morals seem to be quite clear, so he most likely is not
a morally ambiguous character
4. Where did we leave off?
a. Right before Act 2, jurors were about to vote in a secret ballot
5. What is the chair mentioned (page 12)?
6. What did we learn about the womans testimony regarding the el train and how did this affect
the old mans testimony (page 15)?
a. Make sure students mention the loud noise of the train inhibiting the old mans ability
to hear everything going on in the apartment above him
7. Who can explain what just happened here with Juror 10 and Juror 4 (page 27)?

a. Make sure people notice that Juror 10 seems to have some kind of deep-rooted feelings
towards people from the slums
b. What would Juror 4 threaten Juror 10 after saying the negative things about the slums?
i. Perhaps he is just appalled by Juror 10s behavior in general
8. After your first read-through, have you noted any morally ambiguous characters?
a. Juror 7 changed his vote with the majority. Juror 4s vote was turned after hearing
evidence. Juror 10 still let biases about the slums affect his vote until the end. Juror 3
changed is vote at the end, but was this from peer pressure or because he was trying to
play devils advocate the whole time?
9. When you are re-reading this play, take notes in the margins. Note the characters who waver
and why they change their vote. Record jurors biases as they come up and why these would
affect their voting.