My Microteaching Reflection

How effective were the teaching strategies?

I wanted to teach this topic from the bottom up, start with simple signs like a stop sign or a picture and show how they have meanings. Then move up to photos and how they have attached meanings. Finally students will make the connection and see that advertisements are constructed images with intended meanings. The students should be able to make the connection since the scaffolding was put in place. Teaching was done by the peers and facilitated by the teacher. Peers had an opportunity to teach each other and engage in discussion. I wanted this lesson to be full of examples of images and signs and the magazines that were produced for the student age group was relevant to their interests too.

Were the objectives achieved?

I believe the students walked away with critical literacy skills and a keen eye on interpreting signs. This was demonstrated in their presentation of the text. It will be further assessed as students construct their own advertisements and follow-up with an essay.

How appropriate was the content?

The content I provided to the students was very specific. I want it to be relevant to their popular culture and magazines and newspapers and mainly print advertising is something that they will be exposed to for the rest of their life. So I would therefore agree that the content was appropriate for this particular program.

What was done well?

Feedback from the students suggests the lesson went well in general. Discussions were interesting and peaked engagement. My interaction with the students was confident and vocal projection was clear. I allowed the students to provide the information and also backed up and expanded their answers. The instructions were also given out clearly as the lesson progressed.

What could have been done better?

Many things… Firstly, relying on technology is not always the best, there will be occasional annoyances. Perhaps I could have printed off the images for the students. I believe the worksheet was not detailed enough. In hindsight, the (uni) students were able to follow the worksheet fine, however, If I were to give this to a class I had on previous pracs, there will be raised hands. I also did not like the flow between the concepts of signs to photos to advertisements. While I did what I could to squeeze this into 20 minutes, I believe the introduction could have been dealt with a lot more in-depth to give students a solid foundation in understanding sign/signified/signified. Students also wondered what the lesson objectives were at first, and while I suppose the uni students keep an eye out for this as a part of the assessment criteria, the fact that they did see it clearly, means that real high-school students will not see the objectives upfront either. So I need to make the objectives explicit. “At the end of this lesson you will have done…”

I also need to watch my timing with

How effective were any follow-up activities?

I had planned for the follow-up to be an opportunity to create their advertisements and then lead into an essay. I would have loved to have seen this go through. So it is hard to engage the effectiveness in this case, but having done this lesson before, many students find this to be most fun part.

Any other comments on the lesson that you'd like to make?

Perhaps in future, rather than trying to squeeze a lesson into 20 minutes, I should focus on a lesson that is actually 20 minutes, and maybe look at only one objective for the 20 minutes. In the past, my lessons have never exceeded 3 objectives, so 20 minutes for one objective is realistic. I also realise that if I had a class of 20, then having 10 students present advertisements will become very time consuming. And analysis can not be done I groups larger than 3. Overall, I was please with how the lesson went, but in transfer to a real school environment, the lesson I would need to modify some aspects, like extending the time spend on specific concepts.

Micro Teaching ROCKS!

So this week, I’d like to reflect on the whole process of microteaching, I think as a part of the Education faculty staff, you would find this type of feedback useful.

Microteaching is most definitely one of my favourite activities! I’m speaking from my experiences at Curtin where microteaching has been the most enjoyable part of this course above all other activities and exercises that prepare us for the teaching world. Why? There are many reasons, but put simply; it’s fun and practical! Think about how much time we spend and university detached from the schools we all want to teach in. Granted, we are given a chance to engage in practicum, but often, that transition into prac can be quite overwhelming, not to mention the fact that we still have to deal with university assessments at the same time. Incorporating teaching into the internal course makes a lot of sense.

This is what I get from engaging in microteaching lessons.

1. The lessons are short and manageable, they help me to focus on a single or at most, two activities and prepare for them properly. Often when we are teaching, we tend to have a lot on our minds regarding future lessons and hence, our lesson plans and preparation for activities may not be as solid as these dedicated microteaching sessions. Twenty minutes is a perfect amount of time for us to trial a lesson or activity and once we get familiar with hour the students respond to that activity, we can transfer that into our school teaching; with some knowledge of how things will work out.

2. Another reason why I find microteaching to be helpful for my learning is through exposure of other peoples skills! At the end the two weeks we spent on microteaching, I was able to see around 8 potential lessons that I could teach and I picked up many new ideas and resources. So not only does the teacher in the micro-lessons benefit from the experience, but also the students are the ones who pick up on new skills.

3. Microteaching is filmed, while this is may seem like a necessity for assessment purposes, having a recording of the lesson as a reference to see your progression is quite useful. I could see my progression from my first year of teach until now.

4. Feedback is something that teachers always need. Microteaching offers feedback on specific tasks and strategies used. Furthermore, the feedback given comes from multiple viewers and therefore, responses can be gauged from a larger group. While we are on prac, we do receive feedback from our cooperating teachers, however, that feedback is only from one person, and thus the ideas and responses given to us tend to be limited in that regard. The process of giving feedback is also a good way to engage in a lesson and analyse teaching styles. If we are asked to provide feedback to other teachers, then we are able to look at the lessons and see what can be improved for our own benefit.

5. I believe microteaching is a great morale booster. In an environment where you are teaching to your peers, the response and engagement may be better than real world situations, however, that response is needed to boost your confidence as a teacher. At the end of the day, these microteaching lessons are only a bridge to the real world class and so practice in this setting prepares us for the real world.

I believe Curtin has done well by incorporating microteaching into the curriculum. I would like to see more microteaching sessions allowed for this course and perhaps a unit dedicated to learning from microteaching and feedback from peers.

3 weeks of fun

While the others are out on their prac. I am... AFK

Information Transfer

This week I would like to reflect on information transfer. In this workshop, we went though the process of information transfer as a way of allowing students to process what they have learnt or as a way of teaching new ideas and concepts. Within literacy learning, the examination of genre and different text types was discussed as way to encourage better analysis of a text and a more pragmatic approach to reading and writing. Students who are given a new genre of text or information through a different medium need to have the ability to transfer the information learnt into a different genre. I remember when you discussed and quoted, “how do I know what I know until I’ve written what I know.” (or something along those lines).

So how do we actually do this in the classroom? We talked about different forms of information transfer such as schematic to prose, prose to schematic, prose to prose, labelling and structural mapping. All of these can be done in the classroom with student. One of the most common forms of information transfer that I have come across in my teaching experiences is in the interpretation of visual texts. Visual texts contain a wealth of information and meaning. Often, students are able to understand or pick up on those meanings, however, when asked to explain how they achieved that understanding, some students find it hard to express the processes of analysis and thought that they went through to achieve those meanings. So in order for them to understand how the text was constructed and how the visual texts work, we can use information transfer activities as a practical way to allow students to engage with the text and approach it from different angle. I believe this does work, as I tend to learn more with visual instructions rather than written instructions.

Now that I think about it more, this type of genre transfer should be applied to my lessons more often.

Finally, I’ll leave you with some pictures of information transfer…

http://gawker.com/359928/dont-cry-for-me-argentina-and-other-pop-songs-expressed-with-graphs

My thoughts on Bernstein

What a huge workshop. My brain feels fuzzy after looking at this the second time. I remember some of the ideas from the first time doing this unit, but now that I have to sit through them again, I am still trying to come to an understanding of Basil Bernstein’s elaborated and restricted code. I guess the best way for me to learn it and know it, is for me to write about it.

So this is my understanding of Bernstein’s ideas written in this short post.

So this guy, Basil Bernstein developed this theory to explain the relatively lower language subject performance of students in poorer socio-economic areas. Bernstein puts forward two ideas: Restricted code, and elaborated code.

Restricted code: this does mean that students have restricted use of words. An example given in the workshop shows the written interpretation of a picture by students who are using the restricted code. The students who are using the restricted code explained the set of events with minimal explanation and reproduction of the ideas.

"They're playing football
and he kicks it and it goes through there


it breaks the window and they're looking at it


and he comes out 


and shouts at them


because they've broken it


so they run away


and then she looks out


and she tells them off"

The text explains what the student is seeing before them. However, they are not reproducing the ideas or transferring the information into another genre, they are merely expressing their reading of the text. Therefore, this type of explanation does not make much sense to a reader who is not supplied with an image to accompany the explanation. My understanding of restricted code is that, it is used in cases where assumption of understanding is more frequent. For instance, in a case where names are used and insider terms are used to generate intimacy or familiarity.

The second sample we looked at in the lesson shows elaborated code. The elaborated code explains ideas and concepts in a way that can be understood by all readers and eliminates shared meanings and insider terms.

This idea reminds me of a concept I learnt in World Englishes that suggests that, cross cultural communication is inversely related to personality and identity. For example, to effectively communicate an idea to a foreigner, a person must forgo any identity and personality markers, such as accents, regional terms and lexicon. Hence effective communication between different cultures occurs when the person adopts elaborated code.

So that is what I gathered from this workshop.

How does this apply to my teaching?

I think about code switching and how this would effect my communication with my students. On one end of the spectrum, my job is to teach effective communication and therefore, I would try to limit restricted code. At the same time, my use of restricted code could be a way of relating to my students and act as a bridge to communicate with them. I suppose it comes down to code switching. I should know when it is appropriate to use certain types of language.

There is more on this subject at this website.

ATHERTON J S (2008) Doceo; Language Codes [On-line] UK: Available: http://www.doceo.co.uk/background/language_codes.htm Accessed: 2 November 2009

Rules? What rules?

Word Classes. I will never enjoy looking at word classes. Everytime I look at word classes, I realise how deprived I was when I was a child in school. I don’t remember learning this stuff! And looking at it again, I find it a very humbling experience.

The problem (or maybe a blessing?) is that I have learned English through frequent usage. Even though English is officially my second language. I quickly adopted it as my primary language of use. It was only through usage and exposure that I was able to learn the structures and “rules” of the English language.

This brings up a question that I have been thinking about after engaging in this tutorial. Who has better literacy skills? I’m thinking about the hardcore Japanese student who spends his reading language text books, learning the structures of the language, examining all the word classes and practicing spelling day in day out. I have met such students before and their knowledge of the English language and its “rules” is phenomenal. They know more than I do when it comes to this topic, and yet, at the end of the day. I am still a better communicator. So this brings forward another discussion or argument; what are we teaching our students? Since I do want to become and English teacher, I find this extremely important for me to know. At the same time, do I need emphasise these rules and structures in order for students to learn how to communicate effectively. I have learned communicate through usage. So why can’t we apply this to the classroom. Encourage usage and exposure as a way of learning. Modelling appropriate language use and then reinforcing it in students. Do we need to get hung up on the rules of the English language. At the end of the day, If a student is able to communicate in a way that is more effective than he could do previously, then I have achieved my goal. Spending all my time teaching the rules would take away many opportunities for my students to practice communication. At the end of the day, they are left with all these rules that don’t even work in all circumstances and their ability to communicate is not any better. Who benefits from this type of teaching? It is important to know syntax. However, it is not essential. “knowing comes from doing”.

End rant.

Unfinished Business

This is my second time doing this unit, the first time, I did not have a chance to complete it.

So from what i remember last year, this unit will be about the following:

It can get quite complex...

• Noun

• Verb – Auxiliary, modal

• Adjectives

• Adverbs

• Pronouns

• Conjunction

• Interjections

• Preposition

WORD CLASSES! ARGHHH!

No really, I do expect more from this unit, but for now word classes is all that i can remember form last year.

What do I expect from the unit?

In reflection of the first tutorial of the semester, I can say with confidence that this unit will be rather insightful and humbling. Insightful, because it will open my eyes to new views of teaching literacy in the secondary context and humbling at the same time as it will remind me of the many things that I have been taught and yet, have forgotten over the years.

Why take this unit AGAIN?

While this unit has not been intended to function as a refresher course. So far, I can see that the knowledge being shared in the classroom is comprised of an amalgamation of many things that I have come across in previous units. I do not expect to know everything, which is why I am taking this unit…

What happened in the first workshop?

The first tutorial is usually made up of 50% house-keeping and administration and the other 50% is made up of an introduction to the content of the first module. One of the main ideas that was put forth was the idea of engagement. I was told that this unit will be about “getting students involved in engagement with the text.” This brings up a huge question when you dissect the meaning of engagement. What is engagement? How do we gauge engagement? Does engagement necessarily require involvement? I am going to be honest and say that I do not have the answers to these questions. But I am hoping this unit will shed some light on certain terms that we use to define teaching and literacy.