Design a six-minute English micro-lesson that teaches a polite clarification question and includes practice with feedback.
A fictional learner receives an unclear workplace request: Send the report soon. The micro-lesson teaches asking for a specific deadline politely. The target response is a clear question such as Could you confirm the date and time you need the report? The lesson does not assess overall English proficiency.
| Lesson segment | Planned minutes |
|---|---|
| Context and model | 1 |
| Notice the pattern | 1 |
| Guided choice | 1 |
| Write a response | 2 |
| Feedback and retry | 1 |
A small lesson needs a narrow action and a realistic context. Define what the learner should produce, not merely what they should understand. In this case the output is one polite deadline-clarification question. Avoid adding grammar topics that do not serve that action. The timing is a design budget, not a measured completion time.
Write the objective and a three-part success criterion.
Micro-lesson objective
Record your result and evidence here or in a separate file.
The criterion checks politeness, a clear request and a specific deadline question.
Replace understand communication with an observable sentence task.
Show a short example and point out the useful parts. Contrast a vague reply with a question that requests the missing information. Keep the explanation short enough to leave time for practice. The original lesson text in the pack is instructional material, not a transcript of the provider video.
Write the model sentence and a brief explanation of its parts.
Model and teaching note
Record your result and evidence here or in a separate file.
The model asks for date and time without sounding accusatory.
Remove words that do not help the learner reproduce the action.
Guided practice can help a learner notice a useful pattern, but independent production tests whether they can apply it. Use a different unclear request for the final response so the learner does more than copy. Keep the answer key explanatory rather than declaring one wording universally correct.
Create one choice item and one original-response prompt.
Practice set
Record your result and evidence here or in a separate file.
The independent prompt changes the context while keeping the same skill.
Add a transfer task instead of repeating the model verbatim.
Feedback should point to the success criterion and suggest a manageable revision. Accept multiple polite phrasings that request the missing deadline. Do not penalize harmless variation merely because it differs from the model. Provide a retry so feedback becomes part of learning rather than an endpoint.
Write feedback for vague, blunt and complete responses.
Feedback bank
Record your result and evidence here or in a separate file.
Each feedback message names one concrete improvement.
Replace generic praise or rejection with criterion-based guidance.
Choose technology that supports the lesson without becoming the task. A readable HTML or text version can work offline and at small screen sizes. A six-minute plan is only an estimate until learners try it. Keep a pilot observation sheet and avoid claiming the lesson was tested with participants when it was not.
Assemble the lesson and a pilot checklist.
Micro-lesson package
Record your result and evidence here or in a separate file.
All essential content is readable without JavaScript and pilot status is honest.
Label timing as planned until actual use is observed.
Deliver the six-minute lesson, model, two practice tasks, feedback bank, success criteria and pilot sheet. Add a second context about an unclear meeting request to test transfer.
The lesson assesses only the stated clarification skill and does not claim broader proficiency or unperformed learner testing.
| Criterion | Points | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence and correctness | 30 | Calculations, source use and results match the supplied case; limitations are honest. |
| Required artifacts | 30 | All five stage outputs and the capstone handoff are present and inspectable. |
| Reasoning and decisions | 20 | Choices, assumptions, alternatives and the case-specific critical condition are explained. |
| Reproducibility | 10 | A reviewer can follow the stated steps and distinguish expected from observed results. |
| Clear communication | 10 | Labels, units, structure and evidence references make the work easy to review. |
Score at least 80/100, supply every required artifact, and satisfy the path-specific critical condition. Rework missing evidence before marking complete.
The five planned segments total 1+1+1+2+1 = 6 minutes. A strong response asks for the missing deadline politely and specifically. Could you confirm when you need it? is useful, but requesting the date and time is more precise for this case.
This is one original micro-lesson, not an accredited English course or evidence of learning gains.