The lesson started off well, with the students ably
remembering the names of the birds (was not the idea but had them watch the
video). In some cases they got to watch the video again. No problem. Some
issues with the Kiwi accent at the beginning, with the word ‘Moa’ [mɒʊər]
being a problem. The kids had no problem writing, in sentences, to describe the
old men in the advertisement, and then old men of Korea. Grandfathers.
What was a problem was finding words to describe peoples’
feelings or personalities. Even a
sixth grader at this school would encounter difficulty in doing this. The vocabulary
problem was not anticipated and therefore not planned for. It would be an
uncomfortable 10 minutes during the class, and throughout the whole day that I
was scheduled to run the lesson. However it was an uncomfortable 10 minutes
that I’d had in a very long while. Still, it was noted by one of my students
today that an analogy (in the form of two drawn straight lines) was it was like
describing two things the same. In a word he was right. That the physical
traits of Grandfathers from either country can be counted as the same but the
personas, inaccessible to them and, by no fault of their own, unrecognized. Though
the form was there (he/ she is + adjective) the adjectives in question hadn’t
been taught or the themes broached, are not taught until middle school at
least.
The salient message of this experience is, design a lesson
to communicate an idea, a lesson simple enough for fifth graders. I taught the
class, but the message, had not really gotten through in my opinion.
A number of points come to mind:
- When dealing with students of limited vocabulary and communicative skills, keep the terminal objective simple, and easily accessible.
- If the students’ lexical knowledge doesn’t possess the desired items, teach it.
- The themes can potentially be above their understanding. Modulate accordingly.
- If you don’t know their level, ask.
Another lesson (re) learnt is that when students are bored,
they will play, and , not do as they are told.
The MIC’s I tried came in the form of a worksheet, video and
revision of previous target language. I tend to think no matter how well put
together, the best interaction patterns or presentation can be derailed by
bored students and a task that was a little bit beyond their reach. Perhaps ith
+ 3.
Some big concepts you're trying to explain in this post, Jason, but a few of them get garbled... maybe I bit like what happened to the lesson you described? While this is certainly reflection, I'm not sure how helpful it is to you, or that it couldn't be more helpful. For example, you say the students were bored and stared playing - why? What exactly was going on when they started to play? WHat SHOULD have been going on? WHat could you have done differently (and what will you try to do from now on?) to prevent this from happening? WHat if nobody knows their level (highly possible) -- what can you do to prepare yourself for success? The MICs you mention aren't among those we discussed - do you understand this concept? Did deeper, my friend, demand more of yourself as a reflective practitioner. Ask yourself the questions I'm asking here, or refer to Richards and Lockhart.
ReplyDeleteIn my mind, there was nothing with the CIs. I just happen to choose a task that was beyond the ability of my students. I would say that consulting with my KET, who would know what my students should know.
ReplyDeleteWhat should have been going on was that the students were to be writing about the personalities of people. They know the grammatical structures but not the vocabulary to describe a person.
It's a known fact that if the students don't understand, they get bored and sometimes become disruptive.
Key to any lesson is that it is suitable for the students and their abilities. Prior knowledge from both the teacher is needed.