For Module 5 (which should have been submitted at the end of the first semester, but had to be delayed to accommodate the late arrangements of placements and mentors and therefore teaching practice), we were asked to: "Critically reflect on your learning from the first semester of the DTLLS course and identify areas for development including gaps within your subject specialist knowledge to be addressed in Semester Two. Ensure you reflect on the importance of collaboration with your mentor and peers that support your professional practice. Draw on evidence from your reflective journal and feedback received through the observation process." Although I've just handed it in, I may as well post it in my Reflective Journal...
I entered the FT DTLLS course after a significantly longer period outside a formal learning environment and with proportionally greater life experience than any other student. This had positive and negative aspects: I could draw on a range of professional experience, including writing for various media and management training and consultancy, which supported my subject specialism and some aspects of teaching; on the other hand I had predominantly worked as a freelance or independent practitioner, was largely self-taught, and thus unused to a culture in which professional practice is rigorously monitored and assessed against prescribed and somewhat inflexible criteria.
Perhaps it was an error on my part to suggest at initial interview that, as someone with a degree in English and writing credentials, I could teach any related subject from Adult Literacy to English A Level for my placement. Having been told that Creative Arts placements were already taken, I did not pursue Creative Writing as my preferred subject specialism; I wanted to get onto the course. Perhaps it also reflects a certain lack of knowledge within the DTLLS team that I was offered a placement teaching Literacy – certainly my mentor, when I was first assigned to her, expressed doubts as to my (or anyone else’s) capacity to deliver the Adult Literacy curriculum without training. She suggested at once that I should take an additional course to familiarise me with the content and assessment criteria. I was at first panicked by the thought of any additional workload, but when I attended the two-day, ACER Introduction to Literacy course in February, I found it immensely useful and it has supported my teaching in this, and indeed the other areas of Numeracy and Creative Writing.
My first experience of formal teaching was the Module 1 Microteach assignment, when, after a pre-teach survey, I chose to teach “Uses of the Semi-colon” to the DTLLS peer group. I was able to apply some of the theoretical teaching we had received to that point on Preparing to Teach in the Lifelong Learning Sector (PTLLS). This module focused on the basic requirements for teaching and the role and responsibilities of a teacher, including legislation, functional skills, feedback, assessment and record keeping. As I had spent a number of years researching work-life balance issues, my first instinct was to take a survey of the DTLLS class to ascertain what area of literacy they would find most useful, the results of which I was able to use to demonstrate numeracy functional skills.
The build up to delivering the microteach was immensely stressful: the volume of new information from full-time classes, structuring the half-hour lesson bearing in mind the theory and practice of that teaching and simultaneously writing the series of short essays for the rest of the Module 1 assignment also coincided with the first meeting with my mentor. As I have noted above, she was not convinced of my ability to teach Adult Literacy and, moreover, had only three Literacy classes per week which she wasn’t entirely happy to give over to me. However, we instituted a regular weekly meeting leading up to my placement (which resolved into two Literacy classes and one Numeracy class), after which she gave me regular and ongoing feedback and support about my teaching in terms of specialist subject matter and professional practice during and after lessons as well in weekly planning meetings.
I also found very valuable the tutorials I had at this point with the course tutor, without whose input I would have attempted to introduce far too much information into an over-complex microteach; the video of my lesson through which I was able to assess my own performance; and the formal and informal feedback from my peers. I reflected on all of this at some length in my Reflective Journal.
As we moved into Module 2 (Initial Assessment and Functional Skills) at the same time as Module 5 (Professional Practice), I found myself enjoying the academic work, but less so the small amounts of teaching. Conscious incompetence is not a mode I find comfortable to work in, and once again, the in-class microteach on aspects of numeracy was stressful. The collaborative side – we worked in groups of three – was positive, though and for one day, two microteach groups worked together and rehearsed with each other. Again, tutorials with the course tutor and another tutor were highly supportive when I was finding the time pressures of DTLLS work and running a home with two small children hard to reconcile – though my mentor seemed unimpressed by my issues and suggested I might consider doing the DTLLS course in two years rather than one. I had no desire to do this, but in terms of the initial assessment component of our taught course, I was not the only FT DTLLS student to think we had not been given sufficient information about either the intensity and front-loaded structure of the course, or the uncertainty of the mentors and placements assignation.
For Module 3 our assignment was to prepare a case study of an assessment strategy, while in class we analysed and evaluated learning and teaching theories relating to different forms of assessment and influences on assessment. Although I was engaged by the issues of formative and summative assessment, the fact that I had not yet started my teaching placement meant that I wasn’t able to develop a real case study – though my mentor provided some material for the assignment. There was some confrontation, though, when I showed her a scheme of learning of hers which I had reworked (as I was not yet in a position to create one of my own) to submit as an appendix to an assignment. She felt that this could be viewed as plagiarism and took this up with one or more of the DTLLS course tutors.
Module 4, Communication and Supporting Students in the Learning Environment, included a fairly demanding, two part assignment. The first required us to create an innovative resource that demonstrated inclusivity and diversity – and, contentiously, emerging technology – and present it to the DTLLS peer group and tutor(s). I was pleased with my resource, which was a Free Writing activity based on the work of James W Pennebaker, though its only relation to emerging technology was that it could be used either in a hard copy or Word-based format. The feedback from peers and tutors was insightful and supportive, though again I was pressed for time to complete this part of the assignment by the deadline and as a result did not present with as much confidence or expertise as I could have.
The second part of the assignment was a so-called “professional discussion” – although it merely involved presenting to a sole tutor - about communication, behaviour management and barriers to learning. It took place at the end of term, following a significant incident in the teaching programme which adversely affected all the FT DTLLS students. The main course tutor was dismissed and, whatever the reasons and justification, we as students felt that we were not properly informed nor was there a robust plan or personnel to replace him or support us. There was a hiatus in teaching and pastoral support during an important transition time from full-time learning to teaching placement.
I enjoyed preparing and delivering the professional discussion. I was able to draw on my brief experience of teaching placement in an Adult Literacy course based at a Sure Start centre, a Get On Adult Literacy class of very mixed ability and an Adult Numeracy class in which many students had learning and physical differences. I was also able to draw on my professional background in child development, parenting and self-help related psychology. I was pleased to achieve a Distinction in this assignment.
By the end of the first semester I had delivered two microteaches and one solo lesson for a Literacy class. Feedback from tutors and my mentor was positive about my subject specialist knowledge, authoritative delivery, good relationship with students, use of humour, planning and resources. Points for development included directed and inclusive questioning and setting clearer timeframes for each activity. Activities which offer more differentiation and extension tasks were also aspects I needed to work on. To consolidate my knowledge of the Adult Literacy Core Curriculum, I had booked myself onto a two day course to take place in February on Teaching the Adult Literacy Curriculum.
Showing posts with label teaching practice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teaching practice. Show all posts
24 February 2010
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.
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.
28 November 2009
Teaching Placement - Week One
Monday, 9.30am was the first day and class of my teaching practice. An adult literacy class offsite at a local Surestart centre. I arrived before Laura and was let into the "learning room" - a basic room with tables and chairs, a sofa one end and a flipchart. Nothing to assist with the ICT functional skills or emerging technology we're supposed to pack into every session to hit all the criteria of a top teacher.
Laura arrived after a couple of the students;we pulled the tables into a central block and six students settled themselves around it. The five women and one man were all thirties and upwards, a couple of women working towards Level 2, the man just Level 1 and the rest in between. A nice and hard-working group, who Laura had just got started on a recap/warm-up about prepositions when a seventh class member turned up. This woman had a poor attendance rate - in fact should have received a letter telling her she was no longer on the course, but Laura welcomed her and included her in the work.
Laura used the flipchart and handouts, directed questioning and discussion to good effect - in fact in the literacy classes I've observed so far, the more basic teaching aids seem more appropriate than using hi tec ICT - although in college they all work on individual PCs for a large proportion of the class. At Surestart, the same work is simply done on paper.
At break time Laura took the latecomer aside and chatted to her on the sofa. After the break was over, she left me in charge of the rest of the group and took the woman out, returning alone after 10 minutes. It transpired later that Laura had noticed the student had refused a cup of tea (which costs 20p) and putting this together with various other signs, realised something was wrong. This woman is a mother of two small children and had £10 to last her for the rest of the week and no credit on her phone, so Laura had given her some advice about accessing emergency funds and taken her to the main Surestart office to make some phone calls. It was difficult call, she said, but with small children involved and me there to cover briefly, it seemed the best option in an emergency situation.
When Laura returned she set the other women individual tasks, set up tests for a couple of them to do at college next week and I worked with Mark, the student who had joined most recently. It was an enjoyable lesson with an interesting anc committed group and I look forward to working with them further.
I went over to the college after this to meet Jay. As the two DTLLS class reps, we went up to the departmental office to see if we could talk to Anna - Mike's line manager and the FT DTLLS manager, to see if she would talk to us about the situation with him. As it turned out she was off sick, probably for the whole week, and though she looked distinctly uncomfortable, Pearl couldn't suggest any other course of action than seeing her when she returned. Not satisfactory.
Tuesday was Numeracy - 9am to 12pm onsite at college. Yasmin, who did the FT DTLLS course with a Literacy placement last year, is helping Laura with this class as a voluntary teaching assistant to help her get paid work. There are six students, one of whom is deaf and has a signer, one has brittle bone disease and is in a wheelchair, and another speaks unclearly and has learning difficuties. Laura did a recap exercise on the whiteboard on number bonds, which raised a number of other issues. The class collectively has poor memory for concepts.
Yasmin had prepared a section on Healthy Eating, involving weighing and estimating the weight of portions of five-a-day fruit and vegetables. Although she got an aspect of fractions wrong which Laura had to correct, the class loved the Noughts and Crosses team game around which she framed some intital questions about weight values, and enjoyed weighing the portions of real fruit and veg she had brought with her. I worked with a pair of students during this exercise, which I was happy with.
After the break the whole class moved rooms to a computer lab where they all did individual tests and online work sheets. I worked with one student on a test, which went well enough. Then while they were working alone, Laura, Yasmin and I discussed next week's class and activities. I volunteered to create some worksheets around estimating prices, actual prices and adding more of the five-a-day portions. It was agreed that I'd need to include pictures to help the wheelchair student who has poor literacy skills.
In the break, Yasmin told me that last year's FT DTLLS course had been run by four tutors for two classes, but they had many problems, especially around mentors and placements - which have certainly not been solved this year. It seems that all four tutors took voluntary severance after being off long-term sick (stress) at various points during year. Mike was dismissed but appealed and was reinstated - to end up running the full time course more or less single-handed. I went up to the departmental office after class and had the conversation with Scott, as reported below.
Wednesday 12 - 3pm: the Literacy class I've observed a couple of times already. The normal room was having the ITC equipment upgraded so we all, me pushing the wheelchair student, decamped to a less than pleasant classroom in another block without the suite of PCs these students are used to. After a group ice-breaker/recap, Laura set the class differentiated tasks on handouts; I worked with the more advanced group on Active and Passive voices, rewriting sentences from one to the other. I enjoyed working with them, though even amongst three there was a mix of abilities and I wasn't sure I kept the least able learner focused and completely understanding the concept. When I checked his learning with directed questions, though, he seemed to have taken the concept on board.
Normally the second half of the class would have been individual working at PCs, but as this was not possible, Laura asked the class to visit the Information Store (library) and borrow a book or DVD to bring and talk about in class next week. She asked me to find some handouts for next week on commas and clauses, simple and complex sentences.
During this first week of teaching practice, although I didn't take any class on my own for any time, I was reassured that I would in time, with Laura's support, be able to do so, starting with small time periods and working upwards. I felt I related well to the students I did work with, and started to get a feel for their learning styles and abilities.
My biggest area for development remains directed questioning, and asking questions that properly check learning and promote attention and confidence. I also don't think I would have had the experience to note the signs and deal with the problems of the learner in the Monday Surestart class.
Laura arrived after a couple of the students;we pulled the tables into a central block and six students settled themselves around it. The five women and one man were all thirties and upwards, a couple of women working towards Level 2, the man just Level 1 and the rest in between. A nice and hard-working group, who Laura had just got started on a recap/warm-up about prepositions when a seventh class member turned up. This woman had a poor attendance rate - in fact should have received a letter telling her she was no longer on the course, but Laura welcomed her and included her in the work.
Laura used the flipchart and handouts, directed questioning and discussion to good effect - in fact in the literacy classes I've observed so far, the more basic teaching aids seem more appropriate than using hi tec ICT - although in college they all work on individual PCs for a large proportion of the class. At Surestart, the same work is simply done on paper.
At break time Laura took the latecomer aside and chatted to her on the sofa. After the break was over, she left me in charge of the rest of the group and took the woman out, returning alone after 10 minutes. It transpired later that Laura had noticed the student had refused a cup of tea (which costs 20p) and putting this together with various other signs, realised something was wrong. This woman is a mother of two small children and had £10 to last her for the rest of the week and no credit on her phone, so Laura had given her some advice about accessing emergency funds and taken her to the main Surestart office to make some phone calls. It was difficult call, she said, but with small children involved and me there to cover briefly, it seemed the best option in an emergency situation.
When Laura returned she set the other women individual tasks, set up tests for a couple of them to do at college next week and I worked with Mark, the student who had joined most recently. It was an enjoyable lesson with an interesting anc committed group and I look forward to working with them further.
I went over to the college after this to meet Jay. As the two DTLLS class reps, we went up to the departmental office to see if we could talk to Anna - Mike's line manager and the FT DTLLS manager, to see if she would talk to us about the situation with him. As it turned out she was off sick, probably for the whole week, and though she looked distinctly uncomfortable, Pearl couldn't suggest any other course of action than seeing her when she returned. Not satisfactory.
Tuesday was Numeracy - 9am to 12pm onsite at college. Yasmin, who did the FT DTLLS course with a Literacy placement last year, is helping Laura with this class as a voluntary teaching assistant to help her get paid work. There are six students, one of whom is deaf and has a signer, one has brittle bone disease and is in a wheelchair, and another speaks unclearly and has learning difficuties. Laura did a recap exercise on the whiteboard on number bonds, which raised a number of other issues. The class collectively has poor memory for concepts.
Yasmin had prepared a section on Healthy Eating, involving weighing and estimating the weight of portions of five-a-day fruit and vegetables. Although she got an aspect of fractions wrong which Laura had to correct, the class loved the Noughts and Crosses team game around which she framed some intital questions about weight values, and enjoyed weighing the portions of real fruit and veg she had brought with her. I worked with a pair of students during this exercise, which I was happy with.
After the break the whole class moved rooms to a computer lab where they all did individual tests and online work sheets. I worked with one student on a test, which went well enough. Then while they were working alone, Laura, Yasmin and I discussed next week's class and activities. I volunteered to create some worksheets around estimating prices, actual prices and adding more of the five-a-day portions. It was agreed that I'd need to include pictures to help the wheelchair student who has poor literacy skills.
In the break, Yasmin told me that last year's FT DTLLS course had been run by four tutors for two classes, but they had many problems, especially around mentors and placements - which have certainly not been solved this year. It seems that all four tutors took voluntary severance after being off long-term sick (stress) at various points during year. Mike was dismissed but appealed and was reinstated - to end up running the full time course more or less single-handed. I went up to the departmental office after class and had the conversation with Scott, as reported below.
Wednesday 12 - 3pm: the Literacy class I've observed a couple of times already. The normal room was having the ITC equipment upgraded so we all, me pushing the wheelchair student, decamped to a less than pleasant classroom in another block without the suite of PCs these students are used to. After a group ice-breaker/recap, Laura set the class differentiated tasks on handouts; I worked with the more advanced group on Active and Passive voices, rewriting sentences from one to the other. I enjoyed working with them, though even amongst three there was a mix of abilities and I wasn't sure I kept the least able learner focused and completely understanding the concept. When I checked his learning with directed questions, though, he seemed to have taken the concept on board.
Normally the second half of the class would have been individual working at PCs, but as this was not possible, Laura asked the class to visit the Information Store (library) and borrow a book or DVD to bring and talk about in class next week. She asked me to find some handouts for next week on commas and clauses, simple and complex sentences.
During this first week of teaching practice, although I didn't take any class on my own for any time, I was reassured that I would in time, with Laura's support, be able to do so, starting with small time periods and working upwards. I felt I related well to the students I did work with, and started to get a feel for their learning styles and abilities.
My biggest area for development remains directed questioning, and asking questions that properly check learning and promote attention and confidence. I also don't think I would have had the experience to note the signs and deal with the problems of the learner in the Monday Surestart class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
