Class 3-4, Can you...

Classroom observation: Class 3-4

This class is a third grade class made up of 30 students, whom I see once a week, and has English lessons 3 times a week. Their English is quite formulaic, though some of the students level are quite good for the grade. Their ACFTL ratings are as follows. Speaking, novice mid. Listening, novice mid- high. Writing, novice low. Reading, Novice low. Definitely a teacher-fronted class, my goals for this lesson were to give the students as much chance to speak as possible and in doing so, rendering the TTT/ STT ratios to about 1:1.

Presentation Microteaching self-reflection

2. my teaching style in this video is different. I see that I am much more relaxed. I also perceive that the students are also much more relaxed, and so is a big step towards lowering the affective filter. while teaching, I don’t try to be funny (much), but when I do get away from the blackboard and interact with the students, I try to be more engaging, using the TLC of course.

3. The classroom did feel at ease and I felt that the students were very relaxed and able to communicate the TLC easily. I recycled the TLC whenever I could.  When I practiced a chant with the students, I did feel that all the students all the students precipitated, and so, learnt the TLC.

4. I did not plan nor use the blackboard. It was really a practice and produce section of the textbook and I recycled the TLC from the Television screen.

5.  I felt that all students spoke at one time or another be it at the chanting stage, or during the practice stage with their ‘can book’. Some more than others, but I felt that most if not all students participated. There are varying levels within any class, and though I felt that this class grasped an easy concept, they were all able to say the TLC.

6.TTT/ STT. In looking through the video, I felt that the ratios were good, and the exchange was about 1:1. (exact figures to come later in this entry.) In the recycling stage and elicitation stage, I felt that were many chances for the students to speak.

7. Communicative Vs Evaluative talk. I did make more than one error on this ground. This happened in the practice (elicitation) stage. But I feel that there is more communication going on than evaluative speech in this lesson.

What I have (re)learnt is that you get out what you put in. in this case it was reflective energy and enthusiasm. This greatly lowered their affective filter and the students were able to practice a very easy TLC. However a lot of laying the ground before hand went on before the lesson. Winning a 3^rd graders trust can be done by being pleasant, nice, and somewhat humourous.

Reflection from viewing video shot of class 3-2.

TLC: Can you + verb. Yes, I can; no, I can’t. This is the end of the unit with the practice and production stage for the students.

0:16 I just play games with the students by claiming that I can’t speak Korean. It gets certain Ss attention, though in Korean and a few sentences in ‘interlangauge’

1:03 ‘hands on heads’ a control measure by the KEt. I do this too, as a show of solidarity to the students. Smiling eases some of the rebuke that the KEt is giving.

1:37 I start my lesson with a greeting. I hadn’t taught them the adjectives of feeling so, the respsonse is rather, universal. They do some feelings. I should have insisted on a full sentence. But I did get a question of ‘How are you’ after some prompting.

1:55 I elicit by pointing towards the window to get the question, how’s the weather? I have everyone repeat it. The answers ‘It’s sunny and cold’. I respond by giving an evaluative answer.  ‘Yeah. It’s painful.‘  Hum.  Agreeing that it is what one student said is probably giving the pointer that ‘this is what I was looking for, this is better.’ In that light, a nod is better as it’s simply a confirmation.

2:02 I start by recycling the TLC (can you + verb) I scaffold by eliciting verbs first. I don’t go back to ‘throw’, but no matter. The students recite the TLC from the previous lesson. The student responses are good, and in some cases I point. In one case, I find what I want and say ‘one more time’. Dual coding would make it better. Use two hands lifting up. Repeat the next time with no voice. Is the recycling stage too brief? It goes to 3:32. Long enough.

2:44 I’m not sure that that whole class had heard what the student had said and had repeated it for the whole class. Is there a better way? Students should, by definition, learn to listen to themselves, mimicking that of a conversation. I feel that using hand signals would only confuse the matter.

2:55 I’ve elicited ‘can you fly?’ and had gotten the answer to the question. I’m joking around, but haven’t waited for the answer. Wait time. Take a breath. Wait. Smooth and controlled.

3:32. I stop the recycling stage and move straight onto a task in the textbook. I feel that I need to be smoother in my transitions from this stage to the next. It will keep their interest. Deeper thought, must work out a transition for tomorrows class. The solution would be to the task already started on the PC and then shift the questions from myself, to the screen.

3:55 presentation of task. I scaffolded a lot here, and I have brought up and have the students practice the TLC in preparation for the listen and check task.

4:02 I recycle again by asking the students what’s the question? Pointing at the picture is slower, gives the student more talk time. It doesn't seem natural to have such a one-sided conversation. One question is all you need to set the pattern of expected response from the students. One is enough.  I tried this this morning and indeed, one was enough.

4.52 setting of listening task. Could have been done better.  I’ve made two examples in the task, but could have waited for the answer from the students.  Wait time. I’ve also previewed for the students , the TLC within the task so as to help them with the listening task. Use of dual coding for instructions would work better. Use the graphics on the screen as an example. Read out the dialogue. “Does it match?”  Yes. No. Continue to the next example.

7:11 this is going through the answers.  Checking ‘O’ or ‘X’ if the statement rings true with the picture. I ran this task again with another class, and I had them tell me the answers while recycling the TCL some more.

-//Observation ends 9:10 //-

Summary.

My TTT/ STT ratios were tabulated up to 9:38, are 42:55, or 8.4:11. Though not 1:1 this does move away from the teacher fronted classroom to more of a facilitating role. Though in compensation, my KEt has come to the party by explaining the mingle exercise in the later half of the video.

I feel that I have taught the TLC, and that everyone had spoken the TLC. the mingle task at the end was especially useful in having the students practice what they've been working on for the past two weeks. 

Better, more quality thought needs to be put into instruction giving > MIC. Examples are good, they need to be phrased better.

Giving the students as much talk-time, okay. More initiative. Under the direction they could be given more control to start or even pass down the instructions by using the captains of each team.