Still no time....

Another three weeks later and no reflections. However, in the mean time I have been on a two-day course on the Adult Literacy Curriculum, given by Bob Read. It was really excellent and pulled together a lot of threads for me. I've also managed to finish and give in my Module 2 assignment (Planning and Supporting Learning), which includes a reflection on my first officially observed lesson (Wednesday Literacy Class), for which I got a Merit and some areas of Distinction. What a relief - it's actually changed my whole attitude into an I-can-do-this one, instead of an I'll-never-get-the-hang-of-this-teaching-thing one. With that added confidence, and also a really great lesson plan template provided by Asif (the only one of us to get a Distinction for a first observation), which helped me co-ordinate the learning objectives with not only the activities and resources, but also the assessment methods, I managed to impress Laura and Jen sufficiently to get more than the Pass I thought I'd achieved.
I'm going to save more time by posting relevant parts of the Mod 2 essay and reflection here, as part of my reflective journal....

For my observed lesson, I used a new lesson plan format which greatly increased my ability to plan for SMARTer learning objectives with integrated assessment, greater attention to different learning styles, and a clearer view of my own interaction with students during the progress of the class. Using this plan, I was able to come up with a kinaesthetic and interactive energiser/recap on homophone pairs. I began distributing the cards for this matching card game as the earliest students came in, but started the game properly when all had arrived and settled.
I put up the Learning Objectives (simplified appropriately from the lesson plan, to address the needs of the students) on the starboard from the start of the class, and after the starter went through them verbally to ensure “the learner is clear about what they are learning and what the activities they are undertaking are designed to teach.” (DfES, 2001 p.9). I did not specify exactly what I expected students to be able to achieve by the end of the class, nor did I make explicit any differentiation of learning outcomes as “students from non-traditional academic backgrounds are likely to find their confidence levels are further undermined if their beliefs in their own abilities to succeed are undermined by conceptions about themselves which have made it difficult for them to achieve academically in the past.” (Race, 2007 p.20)
Differentiated games for three levels of students followed this activity; this successfully consolidated learning for some and challenged others to segue from homophone identification to the breadth of word types that can be found across homophone pairs.
The resources themselves were varied – from laminated pairs of homophone cards, to an alphabetical homophone/homonym game, a homophone wordle with pairs of clues and a typed excerpt from Harry Potter for reading and highlighting. Dictionaries and thesauri on tables were well used, and some students also made use of the visuwords website (ICT functional skills) which they had experimented with previously in both a plenary session on the starboard and on individual PCs. All these resources were amenable to differentiation and were widely inclusive across the range of abilities and learning styles: the homophone cards, for example, as well as forming the basis of the initial game were used to scaffold lower level learners in other activities. I included numeracy requirements in instructions for the pairing games and highlighting word types in the Harry Potter excerpt, but allowed for inclusivity and differentiation on a one-to-one basis as two lower attaining students consolidated their understanding of nouns by highlighting not six, but every noun in the text.
The Literacy Curriculum works over three levels: word, sentence and text level. By concentrating initially on homophones at word level, moving into writing word types at sentence level, then introducing a piece of text in which the class had to highlight word types (of differentiated difficulty), I enabled them to move across the breadth of the Literacy spectrum. My choice of a piece of prose from this well know series of books and films also stimulated some discussion of the movies, promoting speaking and listening skills which are also part of the curriculum.
The final activity in this lesson was a piece of creative writing. Recapping on work they had done the previous term, I gave them clear instructions (each activity had a PowerPoint slide of instructions on the starboard) on how to plan using a list or graphic organiser. I talked this through with them as a group, and then worked with individuals to get them going. It was necessary to scaffold this activity with two students by discussing possible storylines and writing the first sentence and a half for them to continue from. This worked very well as an informal “writing guide”, and every student was highly engaged and working at the peak of their ability for the rest of the lesson.
Only one of the students had completed a story by the end of the class, which I assessed as a positive sign that they were involved and working at an in depth level. They were all keen to continue with this writing project in the next class, which would enable me to introduce more word and sentence level teaching at the start of the class to be consolidated into the rest of their text level writing activity.


Reflection
A week prior to the observation of my teaching the Get On Adult Literacy class, I had a difficult experience with the Surestart Adult Literacy class I teach on a Monday morning. I had planned a full two hours of differentiated activities for the mixed ability class, which I had felt would be both enjoyable and have strong learning content. Towards the end of the lesson, though, I realised the students were becoming disengaged, disgruntled and, it seemed, unable to learn.
In discussion with my mentor afterwards I realised that, in an effort to maximise learning, I had delivered too much teacher-centred information followed by repetitive worksheet consolidation exercises throughout the lesson. The students had become overloaded, tired and ceased to either learn or enjoy the process. On reflection, I realised that it was counter-productive to push EL3/L1 Adult Literacy students beyond their limits to recall or absorb new information and that processing time is an essential part of enabling deep learning. This can be offered through more varied, “fun” activities which give context to theory, engage prior learning and connect with different learning styles (Read, 2010, training course).
I held this very much in mind when planning my first observed lesson and felt that the structure of a simple, kinaesthetic card-matching game, followed by the differentiated paper-based activies of a clue-based wordle or alphabetic homophone game which led into a text-reading activity and finally a creative writing task gave sufficient variety, learning outcomes and processing time.
This aspect of planning was backed up by distinction-level marks in my observation for “Learning activities are extremely varied and very effectively structured to encourage active learning” and “Well designed, creative resources support learning”. This, and my questioning of and relationship with the students were the most positive aspects of my constructive feedback.
However, a point for development, reiterated by my mentor, was “Develop ways of supporting students who are unable to answer questions.” There was a point in the lesson where I was checking learning by asking directed questions around the class, and over-estimated the knowledge of one student who could not answer an open question (“Can you tell me what a verb is?”). When she was unable to respond to this, I also found myself incapable of coming with a suitable prompt for her (eg offering her an example) and we were both uncomfortably frozen for a few seconds. My mentor also pointed out that because I was standing close to her and she was sitting (worse still, in a wheelchair), my attitude could have been construed as confrontational. In future I will hope to assess students’ knowledge more accurately, but also prepare a range of supportive questions for such situations.
Another point for development was “Planning was good, but ensure there are clear links between your lesson plan and scheme of learning.” I was surprised to read this, but later re-read my SOL and found that I had accidentally failed to save the work I had done on it and therefore given my observer a copy that didn’t link properly with the lesson plan. Closer checking of materials will be carried out for the next observation.
A third point for development was “Use clear timeframes for each activity and develop extension activities for students who complete task within timeframe”. Whilst I entirely appreciate the professionalism of clear cut time-scheduling in classes, my mentor has also pointed out that it can undermine and frustrate less able students if they are unable to finish an activity which is enabling their learning, and that it can often be better to plan extension tasks for more able students than end an activity simply to fit with a pre-planned timescale. This was the basis for actual (as opposed to planned) timings in the observed lesson and I felt that this was justified by positive student feedback at the end of the session, and the fact that we had worked through all planned activities.
Finally, I had planned to display the homophone pairs of the starter activity on the Elmo – which was not working on the day. I will in future plan better for failures of technology, as holding up small word cards was not very effective for students and, had I thought faster, I could have written them up on the whiteboard. I had also planned to flick between the PowerPoint Learning Objectives and activity instructions and other documents on the Starboard, such as the colourful Wordle and the Harry Potter excerpt, which I could have marked up onscreen. I simply forgot to do this – but hope that my ability to multi-task more effectively while teaching will grow with experience.
Neither I nor my mentor specifically ask students for feedback on my teaching, although they are aware that I am a trainee teacher. The fragility of some Adult Literacy students’ relationship with learning, as well as the variable communications skills of students in this class, mean that seeking their direct response to classroom activities or tutors could have a detrimental effect on their learning. However, I do receive, note and reflect on feedback from my mentor – both constructive and points for development – after every lesson that I teach.
Kolb’s learning cycle has proved effective for me in this respect, and specifically in relation to an initial negative experience with one group, after which I reflected on my practice and have been able to evaluate and improve my teaching delivery to achieve some positive feedback, as well as reflect further on useful points for development, from my tutor, mentor and students.


And today I took my first solo class -all mine from SOL to finish. They are an Access group whom I have to get through their Literacy Level 2 certificate text in 16 weeks (32 hours). Some of today's lesson was spent with four of the six students (two were absent) redoing their BKSB online Diagnostic so I could get an up to date view of their strengths and weaker areas. Two of them achieved well over 70% so I'll book them in for the test in two weeks' time and spend next week's lesson on intensive grammar and punctuation revision to get them up to speed on the few areas they didn't score well on. As they don't have to attend once they've achieved their Level 2, this will make the class smaller and I'll be able to do more one-to-one with those who need it. I'm pretty confident they'll all get through in the time, if not earlier. A lovely group of people.
And (another thing), I may be able to get some additional teaching practice in Creative Writing for a group of Creative Arts Access students - which would be really up my street!

3rd March 2010
External Observation - Another Quick Reflection
Pearl sent an email around asking if any of us could volunteer a lesson for the college's external examiner to attend as a paired observation with an internal observer. To show willing, and partly because I thought the times offered wouldn't work with my Access class, I volunteered myself - unfortunately the e.e. was able make it for the second half of my second lesson with my new group. As I'd already booked two of them into their L2 test the following week, I decided not to change my intensive grammar lesson plan, of which the second hour was simply for them to do a L2 Practice Test, and the others to put the theory they had learned into practice with some workbook exercises.
The external examiner and an internal obsever, whom I didn't know, arrived during the lesson break, looked through my lesson plans, resources etc, asked me some questions and looked through my Teaching Observation File.
Inevitably some of the students returned late from the break, which made me a bit nervous, but there was nothing I could do about it - and they had worked very hard during the first hour of the lesson; taken on board a lot of grammar and punctuation concepts (though fewer than I had suggested in the lesson plan - so quite glad that wasn't observed!), and no doubt needed processing time. I got the two who were booked in for the L2 next week started on their practice tests, set up the student who had come for the first time today on the one PC in the classroom to do a revised BKSB Diagnostic, and gave worksheets to the other two less advanced students.
As the internal obsever noted in her evaluative commentary on the obsevation report, I "monitored and supported as required. As students were completing individual tasks, the external examiner and I left the class as there was no further opportunity to observer Literata as teacher." Well, they couldn't say I hadn't told them - I made it abundantly clear that this was what would be happening to Pearl beforehand and in my pre-observation preparation and lesson plan.
I saw the internal observer for feedback later - where she gave me back a BBC SkIllswise handout on commas that I had been using as a resource, scribbled over by the e.e., questioning its accuracy. On checking it later, I decided it was completely appropriate (if a little over-simplified) for L2 students and that some of his comments were simply wrong. The only two graded indicators they had been able to give were 2/Merits for SOL and Learning Plan, which they said had "good detail".
My only real reflection on this is that it gave me a lot of work for no real return in terms of feedback. I know that I didn't entirely follow my own lesson plan in the first part of the lesson, but instead followed the students' needs. I probably wouldn't have got an especially good grade for my teaching as it was very teacher-centred and information-giving with most of the application saved for the second half. However, the student feedback was excellent and, they said, just what they needed. The two students who sat their tests the following week passed with flying colours and the rest of the group did so three weeks later.
This class may not have embedded a deep understanding of advanced literacy in the students, but it met their needs to achieve their Level 2 certificates quickly so they could concentrate on their core subjects. They all also fed back to me that I had clarified many basic grammar and punctuation points they hadn't fully understood before (particularly use of apostrophes, commas, semi-colons and the active/passive voice) and given them top tips for understanding what was expected of them in the L2 test.
There was only one student who would have liked the class to continue on a broader basis after achieving her test. She was an ESOL student who possibly needed more specialist support than I was able to give; however, we spent the final session ona one-to-one basis, going through a PowerPoint presentation she had to deliver the following day. I felt she learned a great deal through that, not only about written English, but also how to use PowerPoint as a presentation aid, format and design slides and edit her own work.

Reflective Journal: 1. Lesson Observation

My friend S (letter of the post before last) was quite right in saying a "Reflective Journal" was a learning tool. Not just a personal option, but a part of the assessment criteria of DiTLLS. I was going to write this blog just for me - and anyone else who happened upon it - but as I have to keep a similar log of the course anyway, and there's soooo much to do, I'm not going to write it twice. So from now on, this is my official Trainee Teacher Reflective Journal. It might not be as frank now as it would otherwise have been... but then again, why not?
So, official reflection No 1:
Last Wednesday I sat in on (not sure if technically this was "observing" or "shadowing") a Literacy class taught by my subject specialist mentor, Laura. As I said before, Laura's a delightful woman - calm, warm, humorous and cogent; her classroom style reflected all of these traits and made me wonder if I could ever emulate them. Especially the calmness!
There were eight learners; two women 30+, one younger Portugese woman (unusual, as she would normally be in an ESOL - English for Speakers of Other Languages - class), three young men, one of whom could have been at school and two in perhaps their very late teens. Then there was an older woman in a wheelchair, brought in by a member of college staff, and Sue, a woman on crutches (a permanent disability) who came in late having burned her hand trying to pour a cup of tea and been bandaged by the nurse. An older man, (Teaching Assistant?) sat near the boys and... assisted.
The subject of the class was Nouns - Common and Proper. Laura explained to me that one of her other objectives was to check out the abilities of some of the learners as she has recently taken over this class and is not convinced that all members have attained the Level 1 skills that they are supposed to have. She started the class with a word grid on the whiteboard, from which everyone was asked to make up words of 4 or more letters, always including an S. While they were working on this, Laura took the register and would have put up the Learning Objectives for the class on the Powerpoint screen - but it failed to work. She called a technician, who came, but all he could do was order a new bulb!
Undeterred, Laura went back to the results of the word grid. Most had quite some difficulty with this and Laura negotiated her way through misspelt words, words which included letters other than those she had put up, and other issues.  But clearly they all enjoyed and engaged with the exercise, and either learned or consolidated information. Laura continually asked gentle questions to ascertain that they had got it, and praised everyone for whatever she could. The ablest learner was one of the young men; the two disabled women possibly had the most difficulty grasping concepts.
Technology having failed, nouns were addressed on the whiteboard; what they were, how to identify them. Again, it took some time for most of the class to get to grips with this - but Laura found different ways to clarify and gave out handouts for one-to-one working - underline the nouns in sentences, basically. As Sue was having difficulty writing with her bandaged hand, I was tasked with helping her, which gave me a chance to understand what sort of ability she was working at. On the one hand, it seemed, she had neat writing and could spell reasonably well (especially words relating to football: David Beckham, Manchester United!); on the other her conceptual capacity was limited and she sometimes suggested adverbs or adjectives might be nouns. I think she gained some clarity from my explanations, and felt we struck up a bit of a rapport.
After this exercise, all the other learners went off to work on (differentiated, I assumed) tasks on the classroom PCs. They all seemed familiar with the technology and happy to use it. Laura asked me to keep working with Sue as she had to do a test which would normally involve listening to passages on a headset, but she thought it would work better if I read (and reread and reread) the necessary passages. It was interesting for me to find out what sort of Literacy was involved; I read short texts involving discussions (who said/thought what), descriptions (a car accident - put the events in order)), someone's work history (dates and time order - embedded numeracy!) and Sue had to answer multiple choice questions about the content. She got the first one right and when she was hesitant about the second one, I read it to her several more times (this was permitted!), but trying to emphasise what she needed to understand. I even started to give her a hint, but quickly realised that I was not supposed to be helping her learn, at this point. Her learning was being formally assessed and any help I gave would skew the results. I played it straight for the rest of the test; she got most of the answers wrong.
The class came together briefly at the end - Laura having been working with the others on their individual PC-based tasks while I'd been with Sue. Everyone seemed to have enjoyed it and feel they'd achieved something. They all wrote something at the end -  possibly a summary of what they'd learned - and while doing so, Sue asked Laura what "that lady"'s name was (mine) - which felt like something of a compliment.
So what did I take away from my experience?
In terms of content, in a Literacy class of this level a little goes a long way (this applies to my Microteach, too - even with highly intelligent learners).
Patience is a virtue.
Always have a Plan B for technology
There's a difference between teaching and assessment. And perhaps my experience with Sue was an illustration between Formative (ongoing) Assessment and Summative (final) Assessment. Formative Assessment can include continued teaching, using feedback to understand what learners know and don't know, and filling gaps; Summative Assessment has to be a stand alone process that evaluates exactly what the learner does and doesn't know at this particular moment in time.
I liked Laura's teaching style, which was egalitarian, warm and sympathetic but with an underlying authority which I imagine would be quite unassailable in the face of disruptive behaviour. The wheelchair learner came the closest to being "difficult", and Laura dealt with her reasonably but firmly. It felt like it came from a depth of self-possession and a wealth of experience. Obviously I don't have the teaching experience, but can I draw on comparable resources? I guess my microteach is going to reveal some of the answer.