I was less nervous than last time. To be honest, I didn't like to watch my video, but I had to watch!!!!
I think the ratio of T-talk to S-talk was almost 45% of students and 55% of me, I reminded let me talk slow and less at this time, it was one of my objectives.
0:9-0:12: I start to speak too slow and boring. The beginning was not interested, even my speaking was not powerful and not clear. I think boring beginning do not get much attention from students.
0:00-1:19 I didn't give to students chances to speak.
1:30 Here was my C.I start! I think it's late a little bit.
2:19 T-S Here is again, I spoke to Jason too slowly, he is 20 years old University student, I think I forgot student profile.
I think my view is very narrow. I only looked the centre of the students. Like Mina, Megan, Kyle, Janson, Ish, and Tom. I didn't see the two sides corner student who were Andrew and Jason D. Students take turn was not fair. Two side students Andrew and Jason never had chances to speak.
I think Q1 and Q2 conversation were pretty good. T-S-S-S.
We discussed about the topic and thought, students had chances to express their thought or idea.
4:28 Tom had a wrong answer, I don't like the way to get answer from Tom. It's like to ask YES/NO!
It's really like to get their agreement to confirm my right answer. This way is too passive. I think this way is little bit dangerous, students have own right to think, but I interrupted too much!
I think this is not teaching.
It means that I am telling to them my thought is always right. I should think other way to get right answer.
6:23 I explain too much about my idea and then get agreement from students.
Q3-Q4 were not really discussed in the class. I think I lost somewhere in the middle of the class.
I felt 10min was long for me. Why? I think the structure of the plan was not correct.
The topic of the article was culture difference concept, but student didn't get the concept of the article.
Students were ready to listen and discuss the reading in the class, I think real class and students would be little bit different. My teaching style was not interesting, I think it is just standard and formal teaching. I was communicative between students and I. I saw I was too busy in my last video, but I was not too busy and rush in #2 micro teaching. Even I didn't understand what I was doing in #1 micro teaching. I was more comfortable than #1. I usually speak too fast Korean, too.
I think that I am transferring L1 speech habit to English teaching either. I think that I speak too slow and unnatural way at that time. I don't like #2 micro teaching.
I planned WB from my lesson plan stage. I was not planned MIC techniques in my lesson plan script, but it was reflected while I was teaching. I am not talking very active, some people talk very interesting way, as an EFL teacher it is very important skills. It's boring and boring again!!!!
I forgot to give them feedback like oh really, good, correct and ect. It is very important to encourage students to speak. My teaching style is like a toeic, OMG!!! I don't like toeic or toefl.
I really would like to be a language teacher~
My teaching was not interactive with students generally, I think I should develop C.Is.
I think I still need more practice to teach more naturally.
Hey Sophie -- this is a start, but you must write in more detail if you want to change your teaching practice. For example, exactly which CI techniques (e.g. repetition, ss ask and answer questions, cueing...) or MI techniques should you use when and where during your lesson to facilitate interaction and conversation with students? Your last point about feedback, for example, might be true, but COMMUNICATIVE responses are also required and not too common from you.
ReplyDeleteIt seemed to me that all students were given the chance to speak publicly as well as in private pairwork, but not to every question. It may have been helpful in allowing all students to answer all questions by modeling a couple of them publicly and then turning things over to pairs for the rest of the questions. I thought that the questions were modeled clearly and appropriately, and that maybe modeling more answers would have been helpful too.
ReplyDeleteBody language was used effectively, especially when giving initial instructions to read the article and think about the questions, but throughout the lesson as well.
More pairwork might also help students feel more comfortable using the language, since there is often (in my opinion) more stress associated with speaking in front of a group as opposed to with a peer, one-on-one. For example, the first question, “What’s the article about?” was given to pairs to discuss, but the rest of the questions were mainly done with the whole class. I’m not sure, though; maybe this was just to save time and showcase CI/MIC techniques and there would have been more pair or small group work to enable more communication that isn’t filtered through the teacher as much.
I think the whiteboard was used effectively to show the questions, and could have been used more to help with answers (like what was done with “I agree/disagree” towards the end). It seemed to me that there was some use of chunking, and it could be even more effective with longer pauses between sentences – but most all of the input was what I’d consider comprehensible to this level of student.
Pacing and volume seemed appropriate for this level and type of student; I thought the choice of language was also appropriate but some students may have benefitted from more repetition of the same statements/questions without rephrasing in order to really get a handle on them.
The balance of teacher and student talk was almost equal, and maybe more use of pair work could shift the bulk of talk time to the students. Again, I think this may have been due to time constraints and showing CI/MIC and therefore skipping over longer sections of student-student interaction that might occur in the real, full class.
As for what I learned about myself as a teacher from watching your video, Sophie, I think that some techniques like TSST were new for you (as they were for me) and that it takes practice to use them smoothly and more naturally. I also thought your intonation and chunking were potentially helpful, and those are areas in which I want to improve.