DAY 24-25 26-27 MAY 2011
It’s been almost a week since I last was in my PhD mode. The reason? The action stage in its planning materials stage suffered some complication due to national holidays which made it impossible for us to meet.
Yesterday we finally met again. Because I’ve got time at my disposal I was the only one with every thing ready so to speak. A ans S spent their limited time collecting, selecting sources and planning how they’d structure their lessons without any concrete activities to share. They said, however, that they’d bring sthg the following meeting. Working at home seems more beneficial for all of us. Although we shared what we had been doing, I did not receive much feedback about my activities. I didn’t encourage them to say much either. It was like I showed them what I’d do and that’s all.
What I feel is that because content is the key aspect here, A and don’t want to produce activities that become the usual language-oriented exercises. Perhaps they don’t want to plan anything in this sense or don’t want to feel in a straitjacket as a consequence of teaching following a coursebook for so long. Now that they have freedom, they want to have it all and do nothing so to speak.
As I was going through the transcription, I noticed that our lessons will be very different and maybe mine will be the most traditional. Then we’ll see what our students think and what feedback each of us gets.
viernes, 27 de mayo de 2011
viernes, 20 de mayo de 2011
AR with a personal advantage
DAY 22-23 19-20 May 2011
I’ve spent and enjoyed two days finding sources, selecting them, planning activities, calling Robert to provide me with more insights about American Rock. Of course all this is wonderful but it’s not real. I can personally do it because I’m almost doing this and that’s all. I’m a comfy position now, I don’t have to be running from one school to the next and spending my day marking exams. I’m at home sipping coffee, enjoying my place and working leisurely and if I want, I can devote a whole day to doing this only. Because Anahí’s lessons will be similar to mine, I won’t have any problems if we share the materials. It’s collaborative work. And if she ends up using my activities, so much the better as it’ll allow me to see how she uses them, how she introduces them, etc etc. A question: should I begin to change the scope of my study? (it may mean reanalysing my data or starting to get new data with new insights) I mean, should I widen the scope and think more about CLIL pedagogies rather than focusing only on materials? Hmmm, good question
I’ve spent and enjoyed two days finding sources, selecting them, planning activities, calling Robert to provide me with more insights about American Rock. Of course all this is wonderful but it’s not real. I can personally do it because I’m almost doing this and that’s all. I’m a comfy position now, I don’t have to be running from one school to the next and spending my day marking exams. I’m at home sipping coffee, enjoying my place and working leisurely and if I want, I can devote a whole day to doing this only. Because Anahí’s lessons will be similar to mine, I won’t have any problems if we share the materials. It’s collaborative work. And if she ends up using my activities, so much the better as it’ll allow me to see how she uses them, how she introduces them, etc etc. A question: should I begin to change the scope of my study? (it may mean reanalysing my data or starting to get new data with new insights) I mean, should I widen the scope and think more about CLIL pedagogies rather than focusing only on materials? Hmmm, good question
domingo, 15 de mayo de 2011
Some thoughts about my own role now
DAY 21 15 May
Back to my PhD mode. Today I managed to transcribe the first meeting in our action stage. I even did the basic categorising but now I need to wait until the end to produce sthg more tangible (and coherent).
As I was going thru it, I began to observe my let’s say selfish, extra-scientific interests in this CAR project. Because I want things to go right I went to the first meeting armed with sources: Wikipedia, articles from mazaines, print outs for everyone, videos. My role is input/sources provider which is fine as I’ve got more time than my colleagues to do this and to be honest we’ve usually worked this way, why shouldn’t I do it now? My second intervention was that all handouts and photocopies for our students will be paid by me as I want to make sure money so to speak is not an issue. This is NOT USUAL but I don’t care as long as we know it’s for a good cause and everyone’s happy with it.
Back to my PhD mode. Today I managed to transcribe the first meeting in our action stage. I even did the basic categorising but now I need to wait until the end to produce sthg more tangible (and coherent).
As I was going thru it, I began to observe my let’s say selfish, extra-scientific interests in this CAR project. Because I want things to go right I went to the first meeting armed with sources: Wikipedia, articles from mazaines, print outs for everyone, videos. My role is input/sources provider which is fine as I’ve got more time than my colleagues to do this and to be honest we’ve usually worked this way, why shouldn’t I do it now? My second intervention was that all handouts and photocopies for our students will be paid by me as I want to make sure money so to speak is not an issue. This is NOT USUAL but I don’t care as long as we know it’s for a good cause and everyone’s happy with it.
It's not easy
DAYS 17-19 9-11 MAY 2011
A little bit stuck with how to put into words my observations and six interviews. Ema came to the rescue though. The action stage has now begun. Lots of preparations as it’s our turn to produce materials.
Contrary to what I had planned, we asked each class to suggest topics. Mistake? The voting was spoken and probably because of peer pressure, voting was induced by popularity or conformity to the masses J) Next time? We’ll do real SECRET voting.
Year 1 chose…History of Music 50’ onwards, The Mayas.
Year 2 chose…History of Rock 50’onwards, Countries and Capitals, History of Football, content, texts, short videos, a song.
Year 3 chose…Nazis (in Argentina) and History of Rock, sthg interactive, stu can read before the lesson, short vids and texts, discussion, a little intro-explanation.
DAY 20 12 March
I need to keep this journal on a daily basis. I don’t wanna miss a thing. Anyway, today I sort of finished drafting the first two stages. Ongoing analysis is really helping me plan the coming stages and reflecting about where I want all this to go and how I can help my fellow teachers more.
Today we got together at the school. We felt that we need to develop the materials individually and then share our thingies for everyone’s considerations. We don’t think the school is a good place to actually produce the materials. We’ll work at home and then get together for a round-up of how we want to do them. I tried no to influence them, that is, I said that the materials could take any form, they could be a worksheet (my style) or like loose activities like the ones they developed.
We’ll try to teach with the materials between the second and third week of June before S leaves for England and I have to substitute her. Nice :S but it’s the least I could do when they are always so amazingly supportive and don’t get paid for all this extra time.
A little bit stuck with how to put into words my observations and six interviews. Ema came to the rescue though. The action stage has now begun. Lots of preparations as it’s our turn to produce materials.
Contrary to what I had planned, we asked each class to suggest topics. Mistake? The voting was spoken and probably because of peer pressure, voting was induced by popularity or conformity to the masses J) Next time? We’ll do real SECRET voting.
Year 1 chose…History of Music 50’ onwards, The Mayas.
Year 2 chose…History of Rock 50’onwards, Countries and Capitals, History of Football, content, texts, short videos, a song.
Year 3 chose…Nazis (in Argentina) and History of Rock, sthg interactive, stu can read before the lesson, short vids and texts, discussion, a little intro-explanation.
DAY 20 12 March
I need to keep this journal on a daily basis. I don’t wanna miss a thing. Anyway, today I sort of finished drafting the first two stages. Ongoing analysis is really helping me plan the coming stages and reflecting about where I want all this to go and how I can help my fellow teachers more.
Today we got together at the school. We felt that we need to develop the materials individually and then share our thingies for everyone’s considerations. We don’t think the school is a good place to actually produce the materials. We’ll work at home and then get together for a round-up of how we want to do them. I tried no to influence them, that is, I said that the materials could take any form, they could be a worksheet (my style) or like loose activities like the ones they developed.
We’ll try to teach with the materials between the second and third week of June before S leaves for England and I have to substitute her. Nice :S but it’s the least I could do when they are always so amazingly supportive and don’t get paid for all this extra time.
jueves, 12 de mayo de 2011
AR cycle 2 – Speaking skills lessons
Day 30-32, 9-11 May
It took slightly more time on day one because I needed to introduce the activity in the class and also the material that I had prepared for students. Everything went according to the plan except for the fact that a few students were not taking much interest in interviewing their peers as they didn’t want to evaluate their peer’s performance. I tried to motivate them by telling them that their peers will do the same the following day as there will be role reversal. Also, I managed to monitor students’ on-task behavior as I sat with different groups several times, but it was tiring. Although I was quiet satisfied with the way things went on the first and second day of the lesson. However, I do feel that implementing this kind of a plan needs close monitoring from the teacher’s end because in a way I had to monitor not only students’ on-task behavior, but had to encourage them to carefully mark the evaluation form as it will benefit their peers in improving their skills of appearing in interviews.
On the third day of the lesson, I asked the SS to review their reports on voluntary basis. With a little hesitation in the beginning, a few pairs raised their hands and shared their positive points. Since the classroom has no audio aid and I really wanted other SS to benefit from individual feedback, I decided to use the blackboard to see the positives and negatives of their classmates. Even the SS agreed to the idea so I made two columns on the board one each for positive and negative feedback. I kept writing the positives and negatives that the SS shared with the class and tried answering their queries based on the negative point each SS shared. Due to the time constraint some SS didn’t get a chance to share their feedback in the class so I asked them to see me after the class. Of course, these were only a few students. But I really enjoyed putting everything on board as it not only summed up the two-day lesson, but particularly helped the students sitting at the back. Unlike the previous cycle, the individual feedback in this cycle promoted whole class uptake of feedback.
My AR cycles end with today’s class. I’m left with just two more classes before the examinations begin after one week.
It took slightly more time on day one because I needed to introduce the activity in the class and also the material that I had prepared for students. Everything went according to the plan except for the fact that a few students were not taking much interest in interviewing their peers as they didn’t want to evaluate their peer’s performance. I tried to motivate them by telling them that their peers will do the same the following day as there will be role reversal. Also, I managed to monitor students’ on-task behavior as I sat with different groups several times, but it was tiring. Although I was quiet satisfied with the way things went on the first and second day of the lesson. However, I do feel that implementing this kind of a plan needs close monitoring from the teacher’s end because in a way I had to monitor not only students’ on-task behavior, but had to encourage them to carefully mark the evaluation form as it will benefit their peers in improving their skills of appearing in interviews.
On the third day of the lesson, I asked the SS to review their reports on voluntary basis. With a little hesitation in the beginning, a few pairs raised their hands and shared their positive points. Since the classroom has no audio aid and I really wanted other SS to benefit from individual feedback, I decided to use the blackboard to see the positives and negatives of their classmates. Even the SS agreed to the idea so I made two columns on the board one each for positive and negative feedback. I kept writing the positives and negatives that the SS shared with the class and tried answering their queries based on the negative point each SS shared. Due to the time constraint some SS didn’t get a chance to share their feedback in the class so I asked them to see me after the class. Of course, these were only a few students. But I really enjoyed putting everything on board as it not only summed up the two-day lesson, but particularly helped the students sitting at the back. Unlike the previous cycle, the individual feedback in this cycle promoted whole class uptake of feedback.
My AR cycles end with today’s class. I’m left with just two more classes before the examinations begin after one week.
miércoles, 11 de mayo de 2011
Preparing for the Action Stage
DAYS 17-19 9-11 MAY 2011
A little bit stuck with how to put into words my observations and six interviews. Ema came to the rescue though. The action stage has now begun. Lots of preparations as it’s our turn to produce materials.
Contrary to what I had planned, we asked each class to suggest topics. Mistake? The voting was spoken and probably because of peer pressure, voting was induced by popularity or conformity to the masses J) Next time? We’ll do real SECRET voting.
Year 1 chose…History of Music 50’ onwards, The Mayas.
Year 2 chose…History of Rock 50’onwards, Countries and Capitals, History of Football, content, texts, short videos, a song.
Year 3 chose…Nazis (in Argentina) and History of Rock, sthg interactive, stu can read before the lesson, short vids and texts, discussion, a little intro-explanation.
A little bit stuck with how to put into words my observations and six interviews. Ema came to the rescue though. The action stage has now begun. Lots of preparations as it’s our turn to produce materials.
Contrary to what I had planned, we asked each class to suggest topics. Mistake? The voting was spoken and probably because of peer pressure, voting was induced by popularity or conformity to the masses J) Next time? We’ll do real SECRET voting.
Year 1 chose…History of Music 50’ onwards, The Mayas.
Year 2 chose…History of Rock 50’onwards, Countries and Capitals, History of Football, content, texts, short videos, a song.
Year 3 chose…Nazis (in Argentina) and History of Rock, sthg interactive, stu can read before the lesson, short vids and texts, discussion, a little intro-explanation.
lunes, 9 de mayo de 2011
Planning cycle 2 – Speaking skills lessons
Day 28-29, 7-8 May
Plan
For today and tomorrow, I will be working on my lesson plan for the next cycle. This time round we are focusing on giving interviews as this is the graduating batch and they will soon be going through their real life interviews. Practice in giving interviews is part of students oral communication course outline. This time I am very much dependent on the material I design so that not only my feedback is communicated, but also the up-take of feedback is ensured.
The lesson on mock interviews will be carried out over the final 3 lessons starting from 9-11 May. The interviews will be in groups of 4 because it will be easy for me to monitor at least 4 students at a time. Each group will be sub divided in pairs so that the task is manageable by the students. Each pair will conduct a mock interview of their partner based on a scenario/case given to them. I will also give them a list of interview questions that one member of the pair will ask the other member. Students will also be given liberty to ask any other relevant question. Each question will be marked by the interviewer on a three point Likert scale. I am using 3 point Likert for the interviewer’s convenience and also because the interviewee can later go through the evaluation and can get some feedback. To enhance the effectiveness of feedback in a class of 80+ students, a short report will be filled by the interviewer after completion of the task, and will calculate the total points from the Likert scale and also total the positive and negative aspects of the interviewee. The likert scale and the short report will act as my feedback to the students because the questions in the likert scale are the actual areas where I want the peers to evaluate the interviewees and act as feedback agents.
In the next class on 10 May, the second member of the pair will do the same with his/partner. Once the pair completes the round of interviewing each other, they would share their judgment reports with each other and would fill out the summary report to select the one that has more positive points. Finally, for up take from the evaluation report, the SS will fill out an up-take of feedback form so that they can discuss it in the class the next day.
On the third day i.e. 11 May, SS will review their reports in the class on voluntary basis in order to gain further feedback from the teacher. Each pair will first share one positive point each from the review form and will then ask questions. My focus will be to probe each pair to ask at least one question regarding whatever they think they need to improve.
Since the lesson is designed in a way that peer-peer learning will be focused, I will get more time to observe students’ on-task behavior. The interview questionnaire, short report, summary and form for the up-take of feedback are the main tools that will engage students in order for them to get feedback on learning to participate in interviews. My primary focus will be to move around in the class monitor how students carry out the task.
Plan
For today and tomorrow, I will be working on my lesson plan for the next cycle. This time round we are focusing on giving interviews as this is the graduating batch and they will soon be going through their real life interviews. Practice in giving interviews is part of students oral communication course outline. This time I am very much dependent on the material I design so that not only my feedback is communicated, but also the up-take of feedback is ensured.
The lesson on mock interviews will be carried out over the final 3 lessons starting from 9-11 May. The interviews will be in groups of 4 because it will be easy for me to monitor at least 4 students at a time. Each group will be sub divided in pairs so that the task is manageable by the students. Each pair will conduct a mock interview of their partner based on a scenario/case given to them. I will also give them a list of interview questions that one member of the pair will ask the other member. Students will also be given liberty to ask any other relevant question. Each question will be marked by the interviewer on a three point Likert scale. I am using 3 point Likert for the interviewer’s convenience and also because the interviewee can later go through the evaluation and can get some feedback. To enhance the effectiveness of feedback in a class of 80+ students, a short report will be filled by the interviewer after completion of the task, and will calculate the total points from the Likert scale and also total the positive and negative aspects of the interviewee. The likert scale and the short report will act as my feedback to the students because the questions in the likert scale are the actual areas where I want the peers to evaluate the interviewees and act as feedback agents.
In the next class on 10 May, the second member of the pair will do the same with his/partner. Once the pair completes the round of interviewing each other, they would share their judgment reports with each other and would fill out the summary report to select the one that has more positive points. Finally, for up take from the evaluation report, the SS will fill out an up-take of feedback form so that they can discuss it in the class the next day.
On the third day i.e. 11 May, SS will review their reports in the class on voluntary basis in order to gain further feedback from the teacher. Each pair will first share one positive point each from the review form and will then ask questions. My focus will be to probe each pair to ask at least one question regarding whatever they think they need to improve.
Since the lesson is designed in a way that peer-peer learning will be focused, I will get more time to observe students’ on-task behavior. The interview questionnaire, short report, summary and form for the up-take of feedback are the main tools that will engage students in order for them to get feedback on learning to participate in interviews. My primary focus will be to move around in the class monitor how students carry out the task.
domingo, 8 de mayo de 2011
Starting my ongoing data analysis
DAYS 14-16 6-8 MAY
No more fooling around. No more procrastination. Went over the first group interview again and again. Thematic approach taken, categories, sub-themes, organsing themes. This took me for ever and still not fully satisfied. www.mindmeister-com proved to be a good tool, thank u Robert. Well, as I was reading the data, finding quotes, double-checking and correcting my themes and categories, the poor thematic network suffered several transformations. Overall, I’m happy I’m doing this ongoing data analysis approximation now as that wil give more feedback for the action stage beginning next week.
It’s not easy though to present the data and discuss it as if I were dissecting the interview. All the categories and themes are closely knit. Motivation and topics selection affect everything so it’s a mess now, but, hey, don’t panic, this is just the beginning…
No more fooling around. No more procrastination. Went over the first group interview again and again. Thematic approach taken, categories, sub-themes, organsing themes. This took me for ever and still not fully satisfied. www.mindmeister-com proved to be a good tool, thank u Robert. Well, as I was reading the data, finding quotes, double-checking and correcting my themes and categories, the poor thematic network suffered several transformations. Overall, I’m happy I’m doing this ongoing data analysis approximation now as that wil give more feedback for the action stage beginning next week.
It’s not easy though to present the data and discuss it as if I were dissecting the interview. All the categories and themes are closely knit. Motivation and topics selection affect everything so it’s a mess now, but, hey, don’t panic, this is just the beginning…
viernes, 6 de mayo de 2011
Reflections cycle 1, ph 1 – speaking skills lesson
Day 26-27, 5-6 May
Though the lessons in cycle 1, phase 2 were more interactive as compared to my routine teaching practices that took place during the initial investigation, however, my concern here is not just students’ involvement or participation in classroom activity. I really think that improving the quality of individualized feedback and also monitoring students’ on-task behavior needs major input from my side. In the previous cycle, I did manage to move around in the class and monitor each group’s participation in the discussion and also, on the third day of the lesson shared with students, the feedback that the evaluators had given to them along with my own observations of the discussions. I still feel that this whole strategy is promoting individual feedback, but not to its fullest as the feedback is still very general and not detailed enough. I mean giving individual feedback is not the only target. In fact, I also need to consider the up-take of feedback so that students actually improve their skills. And I am not very satisfied with the up-take of feedback from the previous cycle as the feedback remained very general and broad. This could be because the task was such and probably because the evaluators were not given enough practice in evaluating students. Similarly for me, the task is even more challenging because giving feedback to 80 plus students is virtually impossible in a 50 minutes class. Therefore, I intend to develop the activity in the next cycle in such a way that whatever material I prepare for the students, that should communicate my feedback at the end of the lesson.
Though the lessons in cycle 1, phase 2 were more interactive as compared to my routine teaching practices that took place during the initial investigation, however, my concern here is not just students’ involvement or participation in classroom activity. I really think that improving the quality of individualized feedback and also monitoring students’ on-task behavior needs major input from my side. In the previous cycle, I did manage to move around in the class and monitor each group’s participation in the discussion and also, on the third day of the lesson shared with students, the feedback that the evaluators had given to them along with my own observations of the discussions. I still feel that this whole strategy is promoting individual feedback, but not to its fullest as the feedback is still very general and not detailed enough. I mean giving individual feedback is not the only target. In fact, I also need to consider the up-take of feedback so that students actually improve their skills. And I am not very satisfied with the up-take of feedback from the previous cycle as the feedback remained very general and broad. This could be because the task was such and probably because the evaluators were not given enough practice in evaluating students. Similarly for me, the task is even more challenging because giving feedback to 80 plus students is virtually impossible in a 50 minutes class. Therefore, I intend to develop the activity in the next cycle in such a way that whatever material I prepare for the students, that should communicate my feedback at the end of the lesson.
AR cycle 2 (ph 1- Writing)
Day 23-25, 2-4 May
Ahh! I enjoyed the three lessons. Things went well and I’m quite pleased with the way students responded to the changes. Surely the sample memo was a great help for the students. In addition, the self-help exercise gave SS an opportunity to rationalize. I did move around in the class to monitor SS and also asked a few questions. The activity became like an oral quiz and SS participated in it. Though some students were still reluctant to fill out the peer review form, but these are only a few as compared to the number of SS in previous cycle. Students continued the writing activity for two consecutive days as there were two practice tasks and at the end of the second class I asked them to hand in their booklets so that I could mark them. One thing that I hadn’t planned and I decided on the spot was that while monitoring SS on the second day, I also gave feedback on draft 2 of the first writing task of this week. This exercise helped SS in improving their second writing task though I couldn’t give everyone a feedback. But generally SS not receiving feedback do listen very carefully when their peers sitting next to them get feedback. Useful learning strategy indeed!
Ahh! I enjoyed the three lessons. Things went well and I’m quite pleased with the way students responded to the changes. Surely the sample memo was a great help for the students. In addition, the self-help exercise gave SS an opportunity to rationalize. I did move around in the class to monitor SS and also asked a few questions. The activity became like an oral quiz and SS participated in it. Though some students were still reluctant to fill out the peer review form, but these are only a few as compared to the number of SS in previous cycle. Students continued the writing activity for two consecutive days as there were two practice tasks and at the end of the second class I asked them to hand in their booklets so that I could mark them. One thing that I hadn’t planned and I decided on the spot was that while monitoring SS on the second day, I also gave feedback on draft 2 of the first writing task of this week. This exercise helped SS in improving their second writing task though I couldn’t give everyone a feedback. But generally SS not receiving feedback do listen very carefully when their peers sitting next to them get feedback. Useful learning strategy indeed!
jueves, 5 de mayo de 2011
Planning cycle 2 – Writing lessons
Day 22, 1 May
Keeping in view the observations and documentary evidence from both initial investigation and cycle 1, I reflected on the lessons and took into consideration the following issues while planning my next cycle today:
a. During the initial investigation, not all students came forward to get feedback on the written tasks. Feedback was self-initiated (students approached me if they wanted feedback) In addition, those who came, received a very general feedback (i.e. on structure, and communication principles) due to lack of time.
b. In order to maximize the effectiveness of feedback in cycle 1, I focused on the writing process rather than the end product and also on students getting feedback on draft 1 through peer review form and later improving draft 1 and writing a second draft on which I gave them feedback. However, analysis of peer review forms revealed that most of the forms were either blank or incomplete. Students avoided giving reasons for why they marked a particular skill as good or average. Also, suggestions for improvement were quite general without any indication of error/mistake in draft 1 and in some cases irrelevant feedback too.
c. In cycle 1, though the writing tasks were better structured (the booklets) with improved guidelines and instructions and almost everyone submitted their booklets. However, when I marked the tasks, I found only a few booklets that actually followed the instructions in its entirety (i.e. completion of draft 1, peer review form and draft 2). Majority of the students had given incomplete booklets for correction and feedback. So I gave feedback to only those students whose booklets were complete. Rest I returned without marking and asked the students to complete the task.
d. Though in my initial investigation, I did not make much effort to monitor students’ on-task behavior, in cycle 1 I did manage to move around in the class and see whether all students were on-task. In doing so, I was particularly able to guide students who were struggling with the task. Though, student satisfaction was greater when I moved around and signed their booklets. BUT MOVING AOUND IN THAT HUGE ROOM IS BREATHTAKING.
Here’s what I plan to re-consider:
a. Creating interest in the value of feedback from both ends (students and the teacher).
b. Ensure completion of the task.
c. Design self help guides which means developing material with more clarity: giving proper instructions, samples, self-help exercise and peer review form that has greater precision so that students avoid giving a general feedback.
d. Leaving blank sheets for both draft 1 and 2 for SS ease.
e. May be there can be others ways to ensure that everyone is doing the task…hmm…what if I ask random questions regarding the lesson or what exactly are they writing at a particular moment? OR if I can get them to write the task in parts and randomly make a few students to read each part as they write (but this is time consuming). I think I’ll stick with the tiring exercise and also ask questions regarding the task.
Plan for Cycle 2
The topic for the next lesson is memorandum writing. I’m using the booklets again, but this time I have made it look like a self help booklet. First, I will introduce students with the concept of memos. I plan not to talk much about the topic; instead I’ll give them a sample memo and will ask them to go through it. Then the next task will be to review the parts of the sample memo by answering some questions about the key characteristics of memos (E.g. structure, content & organization). Spending roughly 15 minutes on this task I then plan give 5 minutes for Q&A before I initiate the memo writing task. Upon completion of draft 1, students will fill out the peer review form (which I revised keeping in mind the outcomes and feedback from the previous cycle). Then there is another blank sheet for draft 2. Unlike the previous cycle, I have not given a self – assessment form in this booklet as I realized students are more interested in teacher feedback then self assessment. I plan to ensure that students complete at least draft 1 and peer review form in the class and draft 2 can then be given as a home assignment. All I’m interested is in the process of writing and generating effective peer feedback. I think getting the first two tasks completed in the class will allow me to ensure both effortlessly in the given time. Rest, I hope things run smoothly tomorrow!
Keeping in view the observations and documentary evidence from both initial investigation and cycle 1, I reflected on the lessons and took into consideration the following issues while planning my next cycle today:
a. During the initial investigation, not all students came forward to get feedback on the written tasks. Feedback was self-initiated (students approached me if they wanted feedback) In addition, those who came, received a very general feedback (i.e. on structure, and communication principles) due to lack of time.
b. In order to maximize the effectiveness of feedback in cycle 1, I focused on the writing process rather than the end product and also on students getting feedback on draft 1 through peer review form and later improving draft 1 and writing a second draft on which I gave them feedback. However, analysis of peer review forms revealed that most of the forms were either blank or incomplete. Students avoided giving reasons for why they marked a particular skill as good or average. Also, suggestions for improvement were quite general without any indication of error/mistake in draft 1 and in some cases irrelevant feedback too.
c. In cycle 1, though the writing tasks were better structured (the booklets) with improved guidelines and instructions and almost everyone submitted their booklets. However, when I marked the tasks, I found only a few booklets that actually followed the instructions in its entirety (i.e. completion of draft 1, peer review form and draft 2). Majority of the students had given incomplete booklets for correction and feedback. So I gave feedback to only those students whose booklets were complete. Rest I returned without marking and asked the students to complete the task.
d. Though in my initial investigation, I did not make much effort to monitor students’ on-task behavior, in cycle 1 I did manage to move around in the class and see whether all students were on-task. In doing so, I was particularly able to guide students who were struggling with the task. Though, student satisfaction was greater when I moved around and signed their booklets. BUT MOVING AOUND IN THAT HUGE ROOM IS BREATHTAKING.
Here’s what I plan to re-consider:
a. Creating interest in the value of feedback from both ends (students and the teacher).
b. Ensure completion of the task.
c. Design self help guides which means developing material with more clarity: giving proper instructions, samples, self-help exercise and peer review form that has greater precision so that students avoid giving a general feedback.
d. Leaving blank sheets for both draft 1 and 2 for SS ease.
e. May be there can be others ways to ensure that everyone is doing the task…hmm…what if I ask random questions regarding the lesson or what exactly are they writing at a particular moment? OR if I can get them to write the task in parts and randomly make a few students to read each part as they write (but this is time consuming). I think I’ll stick with the tiring exercise and also ask questions regarding the task.
Plan for Cycle 2
The topic for the next lesson is memorandum writing. I’m using the booklets again, but this time I have made it look like a self help booklet. First, I will introduce students with the concept of memos. I plan not to talk much about the topic; instead I’ll give them a sample memo and will ask them to go through it. Then the next task will be to review the parts of the sample memo by answering some questions about the key characteristics of memos (E.g. structure, content & organization). Spending roughly 15 minutes on this task I then plan give 5 minutes for Q&A before I initiate the memo writing task. Upon completion of draft 1, students will fill out the peer review form (which I revised keeping in mind the outcomes and feedback from the previous cycle). Then there is another blank sheet for draft 2. Unlike the previous cycle, I have not given a self – assessment form in this booklet as I realized students are more interested in teacher feedback then self assessment. I plan to ensure that students complete at least draft 1 and peer review form in the class and draft 2 can then be given as a home assignment. All I’m interested is in the process of writing and generating effective peer feedback. I think getting the first two tasks completed in the class will allow me to ensure both effortlessly in the given time. Rest, I hope things run smoothly tomorrow!
miércoles, 4 de mayo de 2011
More interviews and planning the action stage
DAY 12 3 May 2011
Last lesson of this stage observed. The lesson bit I was interested in only lasted 10 minutes and the teacher prepared nothing. She just covered the page with whatever was there. Great because it supports what emerged from the interviews, that the coursebook is unappealing to both teachers and students. Fue un trámite. I also noticed, well it may be part of all this later, that in this class (year 2), teacher-led activities cause more noise and lack of attention than when stu assume a more active role thru stu-centred activities. We need to address this during the action stage when we develop the materials and activities, provided that we teachers don’t change them when actually using them.
DAY 13 4 May 2011
Decided to interview A today rather than yesterday. Both were more relaxed today and we had more time at our disposal. We met in the teachers’ room at school. We started and finished talking about other stuff, but the good stuff was in the middle. She didn´t say much because she doesn´t find any motivation from the coursebook. This time I talked more. Somehow I also need to record what I think and I must share it with the others so that they know what I think.
Because we started planning the action stage in this interview, it occurred to us that next week we can ask our stu to suggest some possible topics so that we start from there next time we meet to develop materials. The three of us will ask our stu next Tue, and we agreed that we’ll do it in Spanish, the what after all is far more important than the how this time.
Last lesson of this stage observed. The lesson bit I was interested in only lasted 10 minutes and the teacher prepared nothing. She just covered the page with whatever was there. Great because it supports what emerged from the interviews, that the coursebook is unappealing to both teachers and students. Fue un trámite. I also noticed, well it may be part of all this later, that in this class (year 2), teacher-led activities cause more noise and lack of attention than when stu assume a more active role thru stu-centred activities. We need to address this during the action stage when we develop the materials and activities, provided that we teachers don’t change them when actually using them.
DAY 13 4 May 2011
Decided to interview A today rather than yesterday. Both were more relaxed today and we had more time at our disposal. We met in the teachers’ room at school. We started and finished talking about other stuff, but the good stuff was in the middle. She didn´t say much because she doesn´t find any motivation from the coursebook. This time I talked more. Somehow I also need to record what I think and I must share it with the others so that they know what I think.
Because we started planning the action stage in this interview, it occurred to us that next week we can ask our stu to suggest some possible topics so that we start from there next time we meet to develop materials. The three of us will ask our stu next Tue, and we agreed that we’ll do it in Spanish, the what after all is far more important than the how this time.
lunes, 2 de mayo de 2011
Reflecting on cycle 1, ph 1 - writing lesson
Day 19-21, 28-30 April
I intend to spend the next three days reflecting on my lessons in cycle 1 and analyzing students’ writing samples so that I can then plan the next writing skills cycle that begins after 4 days from now. I find this a lengthy and tiring task, but I need to keep myself motivated for this one! Though initially I didn’t have a concrete plan as to how I will analyze the writing samples, but as I started the process, I found myself developing an endless list of what I need to focus on in my next cycle. Undoubtedly, the AR cycle is just not meaningful without the reflection stage. In fact, I have now begun to question myself in my other classrooms where I’m only carrying out my teaching activities. I never get the chance to reflect so deeply on how a lesson needs to be planned and whether there’s any scope of improving the quality of teaching and learning. I guess I found my motivation for going through the writing samples :)
I intend to spend the next three days reflecting on my lessons in cycle 1 and analyzing students’ writing samples so that I can then plan the next writing skills cycle that begins after 4 days from now. I find this a lengthy and tiring task, but I need to keep myself motivated for this one! Though initially I didn’t have a concrete plan as to how I will analyze the writing samples, but as I started the process, I found myself developing an endless list of what I need to focus on in my next cycle. Undoubtedly, the AR cycle is just not meaningful without the reflection stage. In fact, I have now begun to question myself in my other classrooms where I’m only carrying out my teaching activities. I never get the chance to reflect so deeply on how a lesson needs to be planned and whether there’s any scope of improving the quality of teaching and learning. I guess I found my motivation for going through the writing samples :)
domingo, 1 de mayo de 2011
Cycle 1 phase II
Day 18, 27 April 2011
Feedback day! I brought all the monitoring forms and read aloud only the suggestions, the evaluators wrote on the forms. They students asked me not to call out names so I shared the feedback by calling out only the group names. I realized that the feedback was more general (for example, give more arguments or ideas not relevant). The evaluators had not given individual feedback in most of the cases. Overall, there are quite a few things that I learned for my next cycle.
Day 17, 26 April 2011
The task was much easier today. My students knew more clearly what they will do in today’s class so I didn’t need to say much. They were all sitting in groups when I went to the class today. I just assigned the group names and topics and everyone began the discussion. I was now charged up to monitor individual groups. In some cases I found that one or two members were not contributing to the discussion. So I stood at their back pointing at them while my face was towards the evaluators and gave non-verbal cues to the evaluators to probe the individuals. Also some evaluators were having problems in filling the forms so I made a few clarifications. I collected all the forms once the discussion was over and told the students that they’ll get the feedback tomorrow.
Day 16, 25 April 2011
As planned, I carried out AR cycle 1, but this time the focus was speaking skills (phase II). I first decided to form groups today, but once again thing didn’t go as planned. I thought of conducting group discussions with 9 groups, but there were only 7 complete groups present today. In other groups, there were one or two absentees so I decided to go with 7 groups only. I first made them sit and then randomly asked 3 – 4 students t to sit with the groups and evaluated the group discussion. One member from each group came and picked two pieces of paper: one having a group name and the other, the discussion topic. Then I quickly explained the monitoring form to the evaluators and told them what they were supposed to do.
First 10 minutes, the groups spent on planning the discussion and then the discussion began. While groups were engaged in discussion, I moved around in each group to learn if everyone was on task. For sure this is much more tiring. I didn’t even complete one round of monitoring each group and I was already exhausted…phew! But I could see the groups taking part in the discussion. I also found the evaluators (students) probing the group for further clarification. I was satisfied with the fact that most students were involved in the activity, but my classroom looked much messed up today. Since we have fixed benches and it is not possible to sit in a big round, the groups were sitting of the benches whereas the students evaluating the discussion sat on the front desks so that they could face the group. I planned to audio record some of the discussions by leaving the recorder with the participating groups, but some group members were quite reluctant, so I decided not to record them. At least the discussions gave more time to students to improve their speaking skills. I didn’t share any group markings or feedback with the class today as I plan to do that once I complete the next round of discussions tomorrow.
Feedback day! I brought all the monitoring forms and read aloud only the suggestions, the evaluators wrote on the forms. They students asked me not to call out names so I shared the feedback by calling out only the group names. I realized that the feedback was more general (for example, give more arguments or ideas not relevant). The evaluators had not given individual feedback in most of the cases. Overall, there are quite a few things that I learned for my next cycle.
Day 17, 26 April 2011
The task was much easier today. My students knew more clearly what they will do in today’s class so I didn’t need to say much. They were all sitting in groups when I went to the class today. I just assigned the group names and topics and everyone began the discussion. I was now charged up to monitor individual groups. In some cases I found that one or two members were not contributing to the discussion. So I stood at their back pointing at them while my face was towards the evaluators and gave non-verbal cues to the evaluators to probe the individuals. Also some evaluators were having problems in filling the forms so I made a few clarifications. I collected all the forms once the discussion was over and told the students that they’ll get the feedback tomorrow.
Day 16, 25 April 2011
As planned, I carried out AR cycle 1, but this time the focus was speaking skills (phase II). I first decided to form groups today, but once again thing didn’t go as planned. I thought of conducting group discussions with 9 groups, but there were only 7 complete groups present today. In other groups, there were one or two absentees so I decided to go with 7 groups only. I first made them sit and then randomly asked 3 – 4 students t to sit with the groups and evaluated the group discussion. One member from each group came and picked two pieces of paper: one having a group name and the other, the discussion topic. Then I quickly explained the monitoring form to the evaluators and told them what they were supposed to do.
First 10 minutes, the groups spent on planning the discussion and then the discussion began. While groups were engaged in discussion, I moved around in each group to learn if everyone was on task. For sure this is much more tiring. I didn’t even complete one round of monitoring each group and I was already exhausted…phew! But I could see the groups taking part in the discussion. I also found the evaluators (students) probing the group for further clarification. I was satisfied with the fact that most students were involved in the activity, but my classroom looked much messed up today. Since we have fixed benches and it is not possible to sit in a big round, the groups were sitting of the benches whereas the students evaluating the discussion sat on the front desks so that they could face the group. I planned to audio record some of the discussions by leaving the recorder with the participating groups, but some group members were quite reluctant, so I decided not to record them. At least the discussions gave more time to students to improve their speaking skills. I didn’t share any group markings or feedback with the class today as I plan to do that once I complete the next round of discussions tomorrow.
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)