Brisk and Paraphrasing Lesson (6th-Grade ELA Special Education)
This week I explored an AI tool that supports educators with planning and classroom materials. Instead of MagicSchool, I used Brisk, which my district provides. I guided Brisk to build a lesson around an article I selected from Newsela. I chose this text to use with a paraphrasing lesson because this is a major focus for my campus PLT this school year, and I wanted a lesson that directly teaches students how to restate information in their own words while keeping the meaning the same.
Part 1: Lesson Plan (Brisk + Newsela)
Brisk Paraphrasing Lesson Plan
The lesson Brisk generated is a three-day plan focused on paraphrasing. It starts with direct instruction and modeling, then moves into guided practice and independent work. Day 1 focuses on defining paraphrasing, identifying the main idea and supporting details, and modeling how to restate a paragraph. Day 2 includes more guided practice with partner work and peer feedback. Day 3 shifts to independent paraphrasing with a short assessment and a rubric.
Overall, the plan is well aligned to the objective I gave Brisk. The steps match what students need to do in order to paraphrase well. Students first identify the main idea and details, then use that information to write a paraphrase. The lesson structure also supports my students because it uses a clear I Do, We Do, You Do format and repeats the skill across multiple days.
The rigor is appropriate for a 6th-grade SPED ELA class because it does not ask students to simply swap words. It teaches them to hold onto the main idea and important details while changing the wording and sentence structure. I also like that the plan includes vocabulary and synonym work, since limited vocabulary is a common barrier for my students.
The assessments are aligned to the lesson goal. Formative checks are built in during guided practice, and the final rubric measures the key parts of paraphrasing, such as including the main idea, using important details, using one’s own words, keeping the meaning accurate, and writing clearly.
Improvements I would suggest:
Add a short mini-check that shows the difference between copying too closely and true paraphrasing. Many students think changing one or two words is enough, so I want a quick routine for catching that.
Add a brief note about respectful terminology if the text includes terms that may be outdated or sensitive. I want to make sure the lesson is accurate and culturally respectful.
Keep the technology tools simple and consistent. For my students, one clear option is better than several different tools.
In my opinion, Brisk is useful for creating rigorous lesson plans when the teacher provides clear guidance. I had to make the important instructional decisions first, such as choosing the article, naming paraphrasing as the focus skill, and describing the needs of my students. Brisk helped me turn those choices into an organized plan with materials and a rubric that I could implement and refine.
This lesson also connects to what we have been discussing in class because it focuses on explicit instruction, scaffolding, and feedback. Students get repeated practice, structured support, and multiple chances to revise.
Part 2: Another Brisk Tool I Used
In addition to the lesson plan, I used Brisk to support scaffolding and feedback tools for students. For example, I used it to create paraphrasing supports such as sentence stems, a word bank, and an organizer that helps students track original words versus their own words.
These supports are useful because they target the most common paraphrasing problems I see. Students either copy the original text, leave out key details, or struggle to restate ideas with their own sentence structure. The organizer and stems give them a starting point without doing the thinking for them.
I would use these tools for instruction and assessment. For instruction, they help students practice the skill with guardrails. For assessment, the rubric and checklist make the expectations clear and help me give specific feedback.
Part 3: Reflection
Overall, I see Brisk as a resource I would continue using. I would like to collaborate with my colleagues to gain insights and refine my own use.
The biggest benefits are efficiency and structure. Brisk helps generate a multi-day plan, scaffolds, and a rubric quickly. That gives me more time to focus on what matters most, which is modeling, guided practice, and feedback.
The main challenge is that AI output still needs teacher review. I need to check for accuracy, clarity, and appropriateness for my students. I also need to make sure any technology suggestions align with district expectations for privacy and responsible use. I would not enter student names or any sensitive information into AI tools.
The Oklahoma guidance on AI use connects to this experience because it emphasizes responsible, human-centered decision-making. In my use of Brisk, the tool supported planning, but I stayed in control of the instructional choices. I selected the text, targeted a specific skill, and adjusted supports to fit my learners.
I have also used other AI tools for drafting, brainstorming, and generating examples. The difference with Brisk is that it is designed specifically for classroom work and provides education-focused outputs like lesson structures, scaffolds, and rubrics. For me, it works best as a planning assistant, not a replacement for instruction or professional judgment.
This lesson also connects to Kolb’s Triple E Framework because the technology use is tied to the learning goal rather than the tool itself. Brisk supports engagement by helping students stay focused on the paraphrasing task through clear steps, sentence stems, and guided practice routines. It supports enhancement by adding scaffolds that improve the quality of paraphrasing, such as word banks, organizers, and targeted feedback that helps students revise for meaning and originality. It supports extension when students apply the same paraphrasing process to new paragraphs and later texts, so the skill transfers beyond one article and becomes a reusable strategy for reading and writing across content areas.
Resources:
Kolb, L. (2020, December 9). Triple e framework. https://www.tripleeframework.com
International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards for students. https://www.iste.org/standards
Oklahoma State Department of Education (2020). Oklahoma academic standards. https://www.oklahoma.gov/education/services/standards-learning/oklahoma-academic-standards.html
No comments:
Post a Comment