Diploma in TESOL: Lesson 3 observation feedback Name of teacher:____Dan Levy___________________ Name of assessor: ____Gary Hicks__________________

Level of class Pre Intermediate

Lesson location British Study Centres (Hove)

Date of lesson 18/03/15

Start and finish time 09:30-10:30

No. of students 8

Age range of students 19-30 yrs

Teacher reflections: You need to identify 3 aspects of your teaching for reflection and comment. These can be areas which you feel you would like to develop in future teaching or comments on certain points in the lesson that may warrant comment (positive as well as negative!) Point 1 Muddled delivery of grammar presentation. My thoughts immediately after the lesson were that the Ss struggled a little to give sentences of the target structure while looking at the picture of Helena and Julie planning a party. I think you were right to do so. While watching the video, I noticed that the more I provided the scaffolding, the easier it got to elicit the correct structure. I realised that from the beginning of the presentation, I should have modelled a few sentences myself first before asking the Ss to come up with their own. Of course, it was difficult for them to understand straight away that they were supposed to use sentences with already and yet. I could have also helped the situation further by using the board more (yes). As soon as I gave them the past participle, (bought), and wrote down the vocabulary for each of the objects in the thought bubbles, it became easier for the Ss to come up with the sentences. So this has therefore become my main point of reflection (perhaps ONE of your points). The other issue was when it came to the board review of the structure. I felt that I didn’t have a concrete plan on how to present the form so in the end it felt a bit spontaneous (yes, it seemed that you hadn’t planned this at all). I think I got away with what I did and the timeline activity seemed to work well but I can’t help but feel that it could’ve been better somehow (it depends on what you mean by ‘get away with it’! Perhaps not a useful term to use?). I feel, to a certain extent, inexperienced when teaching grammar and as a result, unconfident about my approach (you mentioned this is your hot reflection, and it does seem evident that you have not a great deal of experience teaching structure). My knowledge of grammar is quite high but I need more practice in how to deliver it in a way that’s practical and consumable for the Ss (agreed), while at the same time not coming across as archaic in my approach, the ‘knower’ standing at the front of the class pointing at the board (so, are you saying that you think you know what ‘not’ to do, but you are unsure of ‘what’ to do?). I said after the lesson that I would use this lesson again but after some important refinements are put into place by providing sufficient scaffolding and more practical boardwork to make the process run more smoothly next time (fair point).

You were trying to teach this inductively. Planning to teach in such a way, with your own materials, is a skill that requires time and perseverance. Having said that, I suggest that it is something that you should be working on. Point 2 Some incongruous lesson staging On the subject of things running smoothly or seamlessly, I couldn’t help notice, after watching the video, how disjointed the first half of the lesson was. My idea for the lead in was to use video as I feel it’s a good way to start a lesson off. I just had a seminar in the materials module where the idea of using video was covered, so I guess I was more than inspired to do the same. The idea of using a video ‘still’ to teach just came from, ‘Teaching English Grammar’, by Jim Scrivener. What the video didn’t seem to do though was set the context (no it did not, not at all; diving into shark infested waters was not the context was it?), which is what a lead in is supposed to do, that’s why they call it a lead in after all. Looking back, I think I still would have used a video to start off with but maybe not the shark one again because it seemed a little out of place with the rest of the lesson and didn’t exactly move seamlessly into the next stage, which was the party planning picture. Another part of the lesson that seemed a bit disjointed was the board review to listening comp (agreed. It was a useful task, but was indeed disjointed). I still stand by using the listening comp from the coursebook as it enabled the Ss another opportunity to practice the target language. However, the transition from the board review to the listening comp did seem rather blunt in a way, maybe because I didn’t do the board review in the right way. All I know is that the feedback I get from this reflection will probably be the most important I get in the whole course as I seemed to have missed a few tricks here. I think you did too. Point 3 Echoing The third and final point is more of a niggle and something I don’t think I do usually but probably did do because I was a bit nervous, and that is echoing Ss sentences. I wasn’t doing this throughout the lesson, it was mainly during the presentation stage with the party planning picture. Maybe I was doing this as a form of scaffolding to help the Ss but looking at the video, I don’t think it really helped them in any way to come up with the correct sentences. Ironically, the echoing came into effect due to my lack of confidence to deliver the form in the most efficient way possible but I believe that with more practice and a few refinements, the echoing would most likely decrease and be replaced with a more coherent approach (I agree; actually, I did not pick up on any significant echoing). I’ve always found the issue of echoing to be a difficult one because I sometimes may repeat a learner with a certain intonation to suggest that they have made an error. I know there are different types of oral error correction but my approach is usually to use that particular technique. The question is, does that constitute as echoing as well or is there such a thing as good echoing and bad echoing? My instinct tells me that, during the presentation stage of the lesson, whatever echoing I was doing, good or bad, wasn’t helpful to the Ss and so needs to be ironed out. My understanding is, that echoing in order to deal with an error or a mistake is not considered by many as a bad example of echoing. But just repeating what a student has said, because you are nervous, or because you think they have not said it loud enough, is not a useful classroom technique. If a student says something that the whole class should hear, then they should be encouraged to ‘own’ it and it should not need you to repeat it. Tutor’s comments on reflection

Your teaching aims were clear, detailed and appropriate. It was a very positive start, and like much of this lesson, I get the impression that you are almost there, but you do not quite mange to refine the detail and a generally good approach does not get the opportunity to ‘shine through’ as well as it could. Planning You offered very detailed anticipated problems and solutions, but did you have differentiated material at hand for different levels, as you suggest? If you declare that you intend to offer this as a solution, you should make copies for the observer. How did you prepare for the extra ‘concept-checking’ for the weaker students? Should this not be in your plan? I think that this should be the case if you are not comfortable teaching grammar. If you predict that phonology is going to be a problem, it would suggest a great deal more thought. Outline what these problems might be, and how you might deal with them, (e.g. how ‘just bought’ links; and the past participles could clearly have benefitted from some drilling). You put a lot of thinking into the problems and solutions section, but it does not look as if you had taken them forward into the plan and potential delivery. I think (and I think you agree) that the video served no purpose whatsoever. I think this is because you did not think through why and how to use it, other than to bring some technology/media into the lesson). Delivery Regarding your personal aims, I think your positioning was fine this time; you dealt well with working in a room that is less than ideal for teacher-fronted lessons. Did you do much drilling? And you did try to get some ‘free-production in place for the last part of the lesson. As I have mentioned above, the video did not serve any purpose, (from a linguistic/structural point of view at least). You had not planned to exploit it for the target language and it does not lend itself to the structure that you intended to introduce. The film showed a past action/event. This event is over, so it does not lend itself to using the present perfect unless you ask the class to imagine they are there, and then it becomes inauthentic and complicated. However, it got them excited! The image you chose was basically OK, but why didn’t you doctor it for the second phase when some of the tasks had been done, so that it was clearer that time had moved on. It is this type of clarity that lowers the cognitive load for them, and allows you to elicit more easily, if they have to struggle with what you have on the board, then you are not helping them as much as you could. The basic idea was there, but you did not seem to plan the delivery; did you rehearse it? Do you think you could have pre-taught any of the main vocabulary? You needed to give more consideration to how ‘already’ articulates not only ‘before now’, but ‘unexpectedly’ or ‘before expected time’. You got across the affirmative/negative/interrogative rules reasonably well, but it was quite a while before you dealt with already. It made me wonder whether or not you understood it at one point. I appreciate that you wanted to use Power point and it is a good thing that you have done so, but you need to learn how to adapt materials and create slides that facilitate learning. Just scanning parts of the book (rules) and reading them through from a Power Point slide cannot be considered an indication of being able to apply knowledge of resources to much extent. The rules could have been broken down into small chunks and elicited as you progressed through a series of clear examples of how the target language is used. The font was small and the slides were cluttered. This is not exploiting Power Point to any extent whatsoever. You missed an opportunity here.

You planned appropriate tasks for the latter part of the lesson, and they did allow the students to use the target language in a semi-authentic and natural way, but your setting up, and your instructions were very cumbersome. You could have demonstrated and CCQ’d. A class at this level is a perfect opportunity for you to naturally use these basic techniques and to show the observer that you can use them appropriately and with ease. One last point; why did you ask the students to respond to questions using in ‘a full sentence’? For example “yes I have already bought the balloons” it is not natural, and it is essentially a pedagogic device that can mislead the students into thinking that this is how the language works. You could have taught them more natural responses such as “I’ve already done it” or “not yet” or I’ve just done it/ not done it yet”. Your intentions and approach are well situated, but a weakness seems to be in thinking through the finer points and these are points that you need to demonstrate at diploma level; the devil lies in the detail, and when you said in your hot reflection that you do not have a great deal of experience teaching grammar, it helped me understand what I saw in this lesson. So you were brave to attempt it, and you were right to attempt it, because it has surfaced some basic problems in your planning and delivery which you need to address (and which I think you can address quire easily with a bit more practice and careful planning). I have used to list below to highlight (underline) areas that you could work on. I am obviously available if you would like to discuss any of these points further. Assessment criteria and comments Criterion for pass: Evidence of ability to apply knowledge of language, language teaching methods, resources and factors affecting language acquisition in the planning and delivery of a lesson. Grade: 45% Signed: Gary Hicks Date: 23/03/15 The checklist below is used by the assessor for feedback and grading purposes (see also descriptors at the end of this proforma). Planning and preparing teaching

Plan contains all required information

Appropriate learning outcome

Understanding of target language

Anticipation of students’ difficulties

Clear and coherent lesson structure

Balance and variety of teaching procedures

Using teaching and learning resources

Materials appropriate for the class

Ability to prepare and adapt materials Teaching and learning activities

Checking of student learning (CCQs!)

Techniques for error correction

Concept-checking

Contextualisation

Personalisation

Appropriate accuracy practice

Appropriate balance of TTT and STT

Appropriate communicative practice

Elicitation

Handling linguistic content Managing the learning process

Organisation of the classroom

Sensitivity to learning

Establishing and maintaining rapport

Managing groups, pairs etc.

Promotion of learner autonomy

Adapting the plan when necessary

Appropriate use of gesture etc.

Voice and diction

Ability to use own language appropriately

Giving instructions clearly

Use of technical and other aids

Effective and varied feedback

Management of pace

Creation of a secure and supportive learning environment

Teaching assessment grade descriptors

PASS WITH DISTINCTION 70-100% Teachers must achieve all of the criteria (see module outline for TE315) specified for pass and demonstrate no weaknesses. In addition they must demonstrate exceptional skill/ability in at least two of the specified areas. In post-lesson debriefing they must show a strong ability to evaluate their own teaching.

PASS WITH MERIT 60-69 % Teachers must achieve all of the criteria (as above) for pass and have no serious weaknesses. In addition they must demonstrate exceptional skill/ability in one of the specified areas.

In post-lesson debriefing they must show a strong ability to evaluate their own teaching.

PASS 50-59% Teachers must achieve the majority of the criteria (as above) specified with no serious weaknesses. In post-lesson debriefing they must show some ability to evaluate their own teaching.

FAIL 49% and under Teachers may achieve a majority of the criteria (as above) specified but have serious weaknesses. Teachers may relate well to a class and have (on paper) a well-planned lesson, but the lesson as observed will have failed to achieve its aims and may be inappropriate. In post-lesson debriefing they may not be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the class, but this inability alone is not grounds for failing.