Liceul Pedagogic Gheorghe Sincai

Profesor: Kiss Kinga

Data: 14.11.2014

LESSON PLAN

Class: XII F
General theme: Domeniul Educational
Title of the lesson: Frankenstein- A modern retelling examining the ethical issues of human cloning
Type of the lesson: raising social, ethical awareness.
Competente specifice: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1. 3.5
Objectives: To extend the themes of Frankenstein into modern scientific dilemmas and examine the
repercusions of cloning
Focus: Pro and con language, agreeing and disagreeing language
Interaction: group work, pair work, frontal work
Material: lab jackets, badges, recording
Methods: - brainstorming
-debate
-discussion
- teacher in role

WARM UP 7
Aim: to introduce the topic of the lesson.
Competenta specifica: 1.1
Method: frontal work,
Material: PC.
Interaction: S-S, S-T, All students sit in a horseshoe display
Description: Students are kept out of room until class begins. The teacher opens the door and ushers students in
by handing them lab coats, badges. Chairs in a horseshoe display await the students. Teacher welcomes students
to the Ethical Review Committee for The Shelly Institute of Science.
Aim: to arise interest and help SS. familiarize with the topic of the lesson.

1
 Liceul Pedagogic Gheorghe Sincai
Profesor: Kiss Kinga
Data: 14.11.2014
Activity 1
Time: 7
Aim: to familiarize SS. with the target language and activate vocabulary
Competente specifica: 1.1, 1.2
Method: listening for specific information
Material: listening material
Description: T. welcomes students to the Ethical Review Committee for The Shelly Institute of Science and
informs them that they will listen a recorded material about cloning. According to the badges they have been
handed and their position they will need to extract the pros and cons of cloning/human engineering.

Follow-up activity: 5
After having listened twice to the recorded material, SS. are requested to confront their answers with the pair
they have been appointed and then via OCFB SS. to report their findings.

Activity 2:
Time: 5
Aim: to

Activity 3
Time: 7
Aim: To revise pro and con argumentative language
Competente specifica: 2.4, 3.5
Method: brainstorming
Material: workbook
Interaction: individual, frontal work
Description: T. asks SS. to think of pro and con language by means of which they can oppose or be in favour of
an argument. SS. individually must give examples and later report back to the class. Similarly it is done with the
agreeing and disagreeing language.

Follow up activity:

2
 Liceul Pedagogic Gheorghe Sincai
Profesor: Kiss Kinga
Data: 14.11.2014
T. notes down on the WB. the advisable pro and con language provided by students, offering thus a scaffolding
structure that will prove meaningful in the following stage of the lesson.

Activity 4:
Time: 10
Aim: To employ the human cloning related vocabulary coupled with pro and con language
Competenta specifica: 2.1, 3.5
Method: tunnel
Material: -
Interaction: in pairs they face each other
Description: T. asks SS. to stand up and the already split up groups of opponents and supporters must face each
other. They need to speak in order to reach a consensus using the vocabulary indicated on the WB. Once the
first group ends their discussion, the first speaker from one row moves towards the end of the line while all the
other speakers take a step upwards. This movement goes on until all SS. have spoken to each other.

Follow up activity: 7
In an OCFB, the teacher asks SS. to present the result of their talks and by these presentations, the T. can draw
the final conclusions regarding whether cloning will be approved or it will meet rejection.

+ -

Supporters Opponents

Those in favour of Those opposed to

3
 Liceul Pedagogic Gheorghe Sincai
Profesor: Kiss Kinga
Data: 14.11.2014

Defenders of Critics of

Pro- Anti-

On the one hand on the other hand ...

There are two sides to this question. An argument for/against sth. is ... (W)

An argument in favour of sth. is ...

How to express support How to express disagreement

Thats a very important point. (S) I would not agree with ... (W)
That sounds logical to me. (S) Do you really expect us to believe that? (S)

I dont want to argue with you, but ... (S)

I cant go all the way with you on that point. (S)