The lesson is a speaking/ listening task, with the students
doing a dictagloss task. My students (ably played by my STG classmates) are at
Elementary level, though at the higher end of Novice mid/ high.
This past week, I’d been taking medication to aid the
condition of my skin. A combination of corticosteroids and antihistamines,
there’s no pleasure with this concoction. They made writing this lesson plan
more difficult than others. But having said that , it’s like I’ve taken a
retrograde step in my teaching methodology. I’ve got the minimum level of CIs. There
was no ICQs on the instruction giving.
The plus side is that it is a creative lesson plan, with plenty of student to
student interaction. I had gotten
interest from my students, laid down a goal for the task and had them literally
running about. The sad thing is that I didn’t put out the reading material out
in the hallway for the ‘students’ to read. Talk about anticipation. Ouch, that
is embarrassing.
How about the follow on to this lesson? Maybe borrowing
Doctor Who’s TARDIS for the day, but to quote one of the lines from the show “Time
can be re-written” and “This is a fixed point in time”. Talk about a plot hole.
The later one of these is more true, and according to current Quantum theory,
requires a huge amount of energy, and a journey back in time to the juncture
point, far enough to change the current outcome. The parallel theory to this
is, that at each juncture point, alternative universes exist. So technically,
there is a universe where I did do well, and also a universe where I am also a
manager of a super market.
But, I digress. Note to self, the CI’s available to you do
work, but take time to implement. The results are good, but will take a little
time to do. They work on a small scale, why not use them for all of the tasks,
not just one? I’ve used a student to student interaction pattern quite
successfully in my 4th and 5th grade classes. It works. I
need to think about the other parts of the front end and change that
accordingly. Have the students say “how do you feel?” to each other, have the
students ask aloud “what day is it?”
Oh, yeah one last thing to note, was the acknowledgements given to the students. As far as evaluative speech goes, I think I've cracked it.
As for the other holes in this plot, more thought needs to be put into it, with a clearer head.
Answers to Presentation: Microteaching; self-reflection
ReplyDelete2. the atmosphere in the video feels to be quite active. The class is responsive and receptive. The students feel positive and engaged. In comparison to previous videos there are fewer CI’s but aside from the massive blue in the middle of the video, task (dictagloss) was well thought out and utilized speaking and listening (for detail) skills.
3. in my consideration, the atmosphere of the classroom is a relaxed one. I try to put forward to the students a caring attitude to my students. I do this by asking how they and asking a little about their lives.
4. I didn’t anticipate using the whiteboard, but I only drew one picture on the board when I did. This picture was used to elicit the British band, “The Beatles”. I did this because I had failed to elicit sufficiently the band, ‘The Beatles’.
5. the part of the lesson that was sampled was the presentation stage of the lesson. All of the students did speak in the class, some more than others spoke. Had the dictagloss task gone to plan then the all of the students would have been covered.
6. TTT/ STT ratio. 10/4.5. Given the type of lesson, and sample, I tend to think it’s at the lower limit, but could be better. An added ICQ would increase the numbers but not the ratio. As stated in lectures, 2 statements of fact and then an ICQ is the rule of thumb for pre-teens.
7. Communicative/ evaluative ratio. I admit to given this a little thought, but never in this aspect. I do tend to use a lot of evaluative responses, in this context it is. They are what I thought was simply confirmation on an answer. Turning an answer onto the next question, and so turning it into a flow of conversation and not a volley of questions and answers.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestions from the peer review
ReplyDelete1) Including PW, did everyone speak personally about the lesson topic or something else in their lives?
I believe that every student spoke in class when Jason asked questions (such as who is the Queen of Kpop). Also Jason had students call on their classmates to read sentences. Pair work was also included in the exercise, however, due to time constraints we were unable to do it.
2) On a scale of 1 (not at all)to 10 (completely), how comfortable do the students feel using English by the end of the Micro Teaching? Can anything be done to make them feel more comfortable?
This is a difficult question to answer, because the class didn't have time to practice new words since we didn't get to the pair work task. This is probably the harshest critique I have, but one thing I did notice is that students were often (but not always) allowed to give on word answers. And due to my ignorance of what the speaking goal was for the day, I am unsure of what new vocabulary or grammar was meant to be used. I am sure that the new vocabulary/grammar is always taught in the beginning of Jason's classes, but since I can only asses the “presentation” stage, it is difficult for me to give an accurate rating. So on a scale of 1-10. I have to say 4. PLEASE correct me if you feel that I am misguided in my opinion, because if I am, I will learn more by realizing my mistakes.
What Can Jason do to make the students feel MORE comfortable?
Well, I assume that Jason went over much of the lesson of the day in his pre-teaching, Thus when he asked the question “who is better, Boa or the Beatles, the students were prepared to answer .“Boa is better because..." Perhaps Jason could have repeated the phrases once or twice during the Micro teaching, as to activate the students' schema.
Questions about teacher Ttalk
ReplyDeleteFind and list the first time when T makes his Teacher talk more comprehensible by using:
A) Gestures: at 0:32. Jason points at the students when he informs them that he is setting them up into pairs.
B) WB: at 2:08. Jason uses the WB to help the students figure out who The Beatles are.
C) Rephrase: at 1:04 Jason changes his use of the word "contemporary" to the word "new"
at 139 in, Jason rephrases a students answer from "Harry Potter" to "this was Harry Potter"
D) Repeat: 1:13. Jason repeats Queen of Kpop.
Jason uses the gesturing techniques the best, and he uses them extremely well.
Pace/volume/choice of language: About right?
All seemed about right.
Did it feel like the teacher or the students were doing most of the talking?
Both the teacher and the students did the appropriate amount of talking.
Note one or two teaching moments that were especially effective:
Jason was able to elicit the answer "Harry Potter" by his use of gesturing AND rephrasing.
Suggestions:
1) Could the English use by the teacher and students have felt less like 'school' and more like a 'real' conversation'? If so how?
Jason could have asked the students if they "like Boa", or if they "like Harry Potter" so that the students could give opinions on the topic as opposed to just answering questions about who they are. (personification)
20) What MIC techniques could the teacher have considered using more often? How and When?
-Repetition could has been considered to be used more, for example when a student gave the answer 'harry potter' Jason could have said "this is Harry potter" Class repeat 'this is Harry Potter"
- Paraphrasing. Once the class knew who the queen of Kpop is, a paraphrase could have been used "Class can you tell me who the Queen of Kpop is?"
- Personification. Could have asked questions such as "Do you like Boa" or "Was Harry Potter a good book (or Movie)?" What is your favorite Harry Potter Movie (book)/Boa song"
3) What would make the teachers WB more effective in providing language support to students?
Well, this is a difficult question to answer because similar to my Micro Teaching, both Jason and I really didn't use the WB.
4) What did you learn about yourself by watching your classmates video?
I need to use Krashen's "i+1" a bit more effectively. Jason seems to do a better job of challenging his students with "i+1", where as I tend to keep students in their 'safe zone" in fear of raising their effective filter. However, students must also be challenged, or they will develop at a very slow pace (or not at all).
Presentation microteaching self-reflection form
ReplyDelete1.In reviewing the video that was taken of my MT of a reading activity, I feel that it was done quite badly. I’ve used some MIC’s but I feel that I could incorporate more of them into the lesson taught and indeed the lesson plan itself. As to answer a question of TTT/STT ratio, it was measured at 10/4.5. Not quite the 50% ratio, but getting there. More vigilance over my self-talk is needed, since everything is processed by the student and, it takes up STT.
2.My personal teaching style is an interactive one, but based around interaction with the teacher. This goes along well with question-answer type teaching. But contrary to communicative type lessons where the interaction patterns are moved towards student to student interactions.
3.The environment I try to create in the classroom is a relaxed one, though in the video Ifeel that I am a bit tense. This can reflect onto the students. Though in my classes at school, they do tend to be a bit more relaxed. I make the classroom comfortable by smiling and asking pleasantaries.
4.In this lesson, I had not planned to use the WB, as it is a skills lesson, but failing the initial elicitation having not worked, I had drawn on the board a ‘beetle’, with the mind of eliciting ‘The Beatles’. This did actually work. Another way of doing this would be to show the students an image on the LCD monitor. In future, anticipation of these sorts of problems is required.
5.When looking at student involvement, in the video and recalling teaching this lesson at school, the students did talk to each other. In this lesson that I planned, the Ss<>Ss could have been planned to have more interaction.
6.Yes, I did speak more than two sentences in between student responses or utterances. From the notes I made from my video, I could conclude that a better design instructions. Less self-talk. More vigilance in responding to students’ answers, and in those responses, how to make them into a communicative response than a simple yes or no. Another alternative is to reply with an open ended statement or question to keep (if desired) the conversation going.
7.Sadly, most of the responses are evaluative and therefore don’t lead to communicative sentences. On the evaluative responses side, there are many. They are simply confirmations from an answer given by a student. To which the ratio is about 0:7. Very poor indeed. Some of the things I have learnt about my teaching personality in making notes from the video are that, I need to plan better when it comes to making lesson plans. Within this framework, more thought into making better task-giving is needed. A remedy for this is to script the instructions (until I know the correct phrasing) for a better, communicative task. The second thing I’ve learnt is that I have a fear of failure when it comes to delivering instructions for tasks, this leads to a more direct approach that excludes student to student interaction. This also means that wait time is very short in the case of eliciting.
Some more thoughts
DeleteMaking notes while watching the video again, my targets were to look at MIC, CI, PW & GW .> in particular the setup of tasks, TTT/STT ratios, how better? Hand gestures – ‘dual coding’
Comments and notes on video viewing, numbers in minutes: seconds
0:17 ‘okay, so’ this is the introduction of the lesson to the STG classmates. The use of ‘okay, so’ is used as a way of getting attention of the class, and at times getting the class to pay attention. This does not work. Use of proper classroom commands (which the students do know) must be used in it’s place.
0:48 ‘okay’ as above, it’s proof that ‘okay, so ’ does not work. Classroom commands will get their attention and then you can go from there. Instructions only work if and only if you have their undivided attention.
Instruction giving still needs to be more robust. On the fly instruction giving will not do. Script the instructions and review them for any vocabulary that is above their level.
1:03 replacement of word >> rephrase “contemporary to new”. A good save, though scripting of instructions would negate this altogether.
1:09 is “one more time” really necessary? Monitor, and respond when needed. One more time is a very teacher centered statement. If some of the students are struggling, then say it. If not then go ahead to the next step. It’s also a waste of TTT, and also, time. Yuck.
1:28 possibly a better phrasing of the question “who am I?” >> I’m from a book. This book is about wizards. (Harry Potter). The more specific the better, in this case, the general to the specific. Top, down!
2:10 could have elicited “The beatles” by waiting. But from an eliciting standpoint, it was a good use of the Whiteboard. MIC and dual coding. BUT, Wait time, slow down, eliciting is an enjoyable process but don’t get caught up in it. Get what you need and then move on.
2:22 confirmation of answer from the question, who were they? (a pop group). “good job” there is a balance between being overly congratulatory and simply giving a confirmation. A confirmation is all that is needed.
Instructions for task
2:34
2:50 better setting of pairs. Phrase the question. “who is a good writer?” Instead of allocating roles. Wait time. Patience. Take a breath.
CI better S<>S interaction, therefore needs wait time.>> fear of failure, give the students time to process, they are young learners afterall.
Then ask to confirm, “who is the runner?”, “Who is the writer?” Slow down.
3:34 the setting of the roles could have possibly taken a shorter time. Less teacher interference, let the students sort themselves out. A bad (naughty) student will not do as they are told no matter what. If everyone does as directed, they will feel peer pressure to do the same. Otherwise pick them out, and then direct them to their partner. Let the partner give them the instructions. Once again, get their undivided attention first before giving instructions. If they constantly need prompting then a number of possibilities exist. Their attention maybe elsewhere; they’re bored because they can’t understand. You can’t do anything about the first one, but you can about the second. MICs. In the form of powerpoints, better ways to elicit, more S<>S CIs.
3:44 recall artists. “Asks who wants to be ___”(BoA, the beatles, Harry Potter)
Wait time. The students need to learn how you do things. Wait for an answer. Do this more than once, and the students will pick up a pattern and respond accordingly. No fear.
Could the instructions have been more streamlined? >> writers, what do you need? Or, pens and paper ready? These are elementary schoolers, a direct instruction is better than a hint. Instructions need to be direct otherwise confusion will reign and time will be lost.
4:03 an unnecessary confirmation. The students seem, or did, understand. Observe and react accordingly. Reduction of TTT.
Delete4:27 didn’t comprehension check. Two sentences then confirm. This is a skill I’m going to have to think about how to do in class well. It is a worthy skill to master as I’ve seen.
6:00/ 6:04 shown students questions. Students read out aloud the questions. If they are reading the questions, then they are thinking about them. Good.
Another big gap between the last landmark and this one. 90 seconds of what into the ether? I think that I had been repeating the questions. (A more precise observation is needed)
7:23 students sent out to read the material.
>>NO READING MATERIAL!
>>did not conceptualize this during planning. This is a fundamental mistake. Rehearse the lesson plan. Walk it though, what instructions here? Have I prepared this stage properly? If not, was is there something wrong with the approach? If yes, then another approach is needed. There are more than two ways to do it. Think, and choose.