3.4 Implementation Timing

3.4 Implementation Timing: An appropriate amount of time was devoted to each part of the lesson.

This indicator analyzes the pace and flow of the lesson. It is important to note whether the amount of time devoted to each part of the lesson is sufficient, with portions of the lesson neither becoming overly repetitive nor being rushed through. This indicator should be evidenced by examining the progress of the students (i.e., whether their needs are being met by the pace of the instruction) and the amount of time dedicated to important and less crucial aspects of the lesson (e.g., most of the time devoted to a lab activity should allow the students to carry out the investigation rather than the teacher giving procedural directions). Even if the lesson is an extended inquiry that is designed to continue for several days, some time for introduction at the beginning and wrap up and reflection at the end of the class period is appropriate.

General Rubric

1. This item should be rated a 1 if there was a significant amount of wasted time during the class period where students were unengaged or off task, or if there was another major timing issue that disrupted student learning.
   
    
2. This item should be rated a 2 if there were several instances of wasted time during the class period where students were off task, and/or if an appropriate amount of time was not devoted to key portions of the lesson, leading to confusion or frustration on the part of the students.
   
    
3. This item should be rated a 3 if there were no major timing issues or wasted time during the lesson, but perhaps an appropriate amount of time was not devoted to more important parts of the lesson, like the time allotted for student lab work was not sufficient, or the wrap up portion of the lesson was missing. A few students disengaged early or were left trying to finish when the bell rang.
   
    
4. This item should be rated a 4 if sufficient amounts of time were devoted to the most important portions of the lesson and appropriate amounts of time for introduction, instructions, and wrap up were evidenced because most of the students were engaged and productively on-task throughout the lesson. There may have been one instance of wasted time, or one portion of the lesson might have been slightly more rushed or allotted more time than it should have been, but the overall flow and timing allowed most students to accomplish the work of the lesson activity.
   
    
5. This item should be rated a 5 if the appropriate amount of time was devoted to all portions of the lesson, including introduction, instructions, and wrap up. All students were productively on-task, as there were no instances of wasted time during this lesson, and all parts of the lesson proceeded at an appropriate pace.

Specific Examples of Supporting Evidence

1. The teacher began the class by copying an example problem on the overhead directly from the chemistry textbook, showing the steps to solving a stoichiometry problem. Several students raised their hands to ask questions, but the teacher did not call on them and told them to just copy the problem into their notes. A few students at the back of the room called out “Why are we doing this?” but the teacher ignored them. After 45 minutes of copying sample problems, most students had closed their notebooks and disengaged—chatting with each other, applying make-up, or sleeping. This continued until the bell rang and the students simply gathered their belongings and walked out the door.
   
    
2. The teacher assigned a different stoichiometry problem to each student group and told them to write out their work, step by step, on an overhead transparency so that they could present their solutions to the class. The teacher took 25 minutes at the beginning of the class period getting the student groups organized. Once the groups started working, the teacher circulated to monitor progress but spent a lot of time at two of the six groups, repeating the directions and leading each student through each step of the calculation. Groups who were not in contact with the teacher were unable to start the calculation and disengaged quickly, becoming frustrated. As a result, the class ended before all student groups had a chance to present.
   
    
3. The teacher spent five minutes at the beginning of the class demonstrating how to solve a stoichiometry problem and then referred students to the text where additional solved problems were illustrated. The time devoted to introduction, group work, and student presentation portions of this lesson seemed to be adequate for most students, but when one group finished early, the teacher did not challenge them with another task. One group monopolized most of the teacher’s time, so that not all groups were able to present their solutions and the teacher did not have time to summarize or provide a wrap up at the end of class.
   
    
4. As the students entered the classroom, the teacher handed them a group assignment and sent them to a pre-arranged set of desks to work. As soon as the class started, the teacher showed the students how to solve a stoichiometry problem on the board, labeling each step in the multi-step problem. The teacher used an overhead timer and announced that the groups would have five minutes to complete each problem assigned to their group, then they would begin presenting their work and explaining their rationale for their solution to the whole class. The teacher moved to monitor each group’s work frequently, keeping students engaged and on-task while moving on to the next group within 30 seconds. Although all groups managed to present their work to the whole class, time ran out and the teacher offered no wrap up of the content taught during this lesson.
   
    
5. Students entered the classroom and took seats in previously assigned groups. The teacher briefly demonstrated the steps to solving a stoichiometry problem and then gave groups different problem sets to solve and poster paper on which to write their solutions for presentation in a gallery walk. The teacher used an overhead timer and announced that the groups would have five minutes to complete each problem assigned to their group, then they would begin presenting their work by posting their papers around the classroom. The teacher allowed early finishers to tutor slower student groups and help them complete their work. The teacher explained how the gallery would work and the students took turns explaining their rationale for their solution to other students who came by their posters. All student groups had time to share their understanding during the gallery walk, and the teacher used the last group’s work to summarize for the whole class the steps to solving stoichiometry problems.