Micro teaching 2 re-publish

This is a second take on my reflection of my micro teaching 2.

Presentation microteaching self-reflection form

1.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

Making 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.