Diploma in TESOL: Lesson observation feedback Name of teacher:______Dan Levy_________________ Name of assessor: ____Nancy Carter__________________

Level of class Upper Intermediate

Lesson location British Study Centres

Date of lesson 08/04/15

Start and finish time 11:00-12:00

No. of students 12

Age range of students 17-32

Teacher reflections: You need to identify 3 aspects of your teaching for reflection and comment. These can be areas which you feel you would like to develop in future teaching or comments on certain points in the lesson that may warrant comment (positive as well as negative!) Point 1 - Elicitation of form Looking back at the lesson, I noticed that there was a hitch with the elicitation stage when I was trying to elicit the form. The images I used were effective and engaged the students to the point where they could really relate to them. The issue here though is getting to the stage where I can actually elicit the form and I was a bit stuck about how to do it on this occasion. In the end, I gave it to them but can’t help thinking whether I had handed it to them on a plate. If I could go back and do it again, I think I would have used more effective CCQ’s to let the students into the fact that I was fishing for something. An example of what I could have asked is, “I’m looking for a different way of saying, ‘I’m familiar with something now’”. When you’re trying to elicit a structure that the students are more familiar with or have studied before like the tenses or the passive for example, it is easier to get them to figure it out. I need to find a better strategy to elicit more unknown forms and I think more effective CCQ’s would have helped. I know at least one student had encountered the form of ‘be used to’ before as she used it during the lead-in, so I shouldn’t have needed to give them the form so easily. I wouldn’t be too hard on yourself on this point as you can’t elicit what students don’t know. You knew that one student could use it from earlier in the lesson and possibly you could have emphasised the language she used a bit more strongly at that point e.g. asking her to repeat it a couple of times or telling the class to remember what she said. However, as her utterance was unexpected, its use could not be planned into the lesson. When they didn’t give you the target language later you did refer back to what she had said, but maybe you could have given them a clue such as the first letters of the words in the form. Point 2 – Drilling The planned drilling stage didn’t go as well as I would have liked but frustratingly, if I had gone back to the presentation with the two students on the powerpoint, and got the class to produce sentences in the target language using the text in the speech bubbles, it would have probably worked out better in the end. I had even put this into my plan but forgot to do it, which is why it is frustrating. Instead, the drilling stage fell apart a little bit. It was OK at first when the students were

practicing the saying the phrases in pairs but as soon as I asked them to do it individually, they resisted. Now I realise if I had followed my plan on this occasion, the students would at least have to work out what to say according to the speech bubbles rather than just focusing on how to say it. This is an area I want to read up on though, looking at the different drilling techniques that are available but also looking to spread it out throughout the lesson, not just in one stage. For example, if I have just elicited the form, I can look to drill it then, also when I am looking at example sentences in a controlled practice. I feel that the more I understand the different techniques of drilling, the more comfortable I will be with it. I agree that this stage wasn’t particularly successful and much of that may be because you don’t feel comfortable with the techniques. Drilling is a bit like marmite: you either love it or hate it. I think the important thing is to be able to justify why you use it, or why you don’t and it sounds like, as you say, you need to think about this a bit more. I would advise you to only use it when you have noticed a problem with an aspect of pronunciation, be clear to the students about why they are drilling, give them time to practise in pairs (as you did), and then do a choral drill before nominating students individually. Point 3 – Free stage error correction The other thing I noticed was during the free stage of the lesson, and I remember feeling the same thing while I was in the lesson. While the Ss were engaging with each other in pairs, I was trying to pick out errors they were making but found it hard to focus on each conversation individually because the students were all talking at the same time and some of them were quite boisterous. The other thing going through my mind at the time was the fact that it is a free stage activity and I shouldn’t really interfere with their interactions. The issue here though is that I was feeling and looked on the video a bit lost at sea. I did eventually go to a pair and asked them for feedback while the rest of the class were still engaging with each other and found out what they were talking about. The only reason I approached them when I did though was because they looked as though they were finishing up their conversation and so I felt it acceptable to intervene. I believe the problem I had here was trying to judge when or even if I should hone in on different pairs while they were still interacting with each other. I found it very difficult to listen in on each pair from a distance as the noise levels were fairly high. Of course it’s a good thing that the students engaged with it like they did but I felt as though I could have done more to help with correcting them after the activity. I need to figure out an approach to help me with more effectively identifying potential errors that are made in free stage activities, without interfering too much, so that the feedback is more constructive for the students. It was a shame that you didn’t manage to pick up on some errors in the freer practice stage as there were definitely errors in form being made over my side. Maybe you need to think of your monitoring as being as unobtrusive as possible and completely different from intervening. In a smaller class, it is sometimes possible to listen from a distance and pick out individual conversations satisfactorily, but in a larger class you do need to move closer but not join in or help. Obviously, they will notice your presence, but they tend to get used to it pretty quickly. If it is a problem, you can explain in your instructions for the task that you will be listening in for examples of interesting and incorrect language. In general, students like to have their errors corrected, so I wouldn’t imagine it being a problem. Try and collect an error for each student/group as when you board errors they often try and identify their own so it’s good to have a balance. Tutor’s comments on reflection

You are fairly critical of yourself which is often the way when a setback occurs. Remember to try and hone in on some of the positives of your ability, because there are plenty. Also make sure you do try and work out your own strategies to improve these aspects of your teaching. If you can’t think of any, or want some extra ideas aside from the ones I have suggested, use hand books such as Harmer, Scrivener or Ur. Also, if possible, continue the process of peer observation as it can enable some excellent development opportunities. Notes taken whilst observing 11.00 Asked ss how long they have been studying at BSC. Set the context immediately that continued

throughout the lesson so coherent flow.

Indicated the lead in question on the board: what was your first day at BSC like? How did you feel?

11.02 ss discussed questions in pairs. Plenty of discussion, everyone engaged. Big lively class

11.04 you need to get the whole class’ attention before asking for feedback. Explanation of ss phrase

'full of beans'. Variety of adjectives offered. One girl said 'get used to the food'. You picked up on it

and said interesting.

11.06 you use a made up profile of a possible ss and her situation and journey to England. Nice use of

pics. Humour. When ss related to the problems you asked if the situation had changed/ whether it has

become more familiar. Recast pron error: pronounce

11.10 you introduced a second imaginary ss who has a more positive experience but still not

completely familiarised with the UK. Concept checking as you go along and careful not to use target

language.

11.12 you try to elicit be/get used to by focusing them on the differences between the two ss. They

gave good differences but not the TL. Had to refer back to Charlotte the ss who used the TL earlier.

Then used the second ss e.g. To elicit some get/be used to examples. Careful scripting and inclusion

of CCQs on lesson plan.

11.15 instructions for the being used to meter. Clear. Modelled a quick e.g. In front of the class. Had to

add an extra part of the instruction after they had started. Worked in pairs and matched e.g. sentences

to a place on the scale. Ss could do this but the couple of problems were dealt with infront of whole

class e.g. The difference in strength and meaning between I'm not used to and I can't get used to.

Only the girls near me including Charlotte not completely engaged – are they stronger? Ss matched

the functions very quickly while you were writing e.g. Sentences on board. You could have had these

on .ppt or notebook software to save time. I’m not convinced that being used to something the same

as liking something. Lots of clear CCQs. You do veer towards a teacher centred presentation stage. So

in this case more could have been pre-prepared on the board and had the ss up and matching by

dragging and dropping.

11.27 you focuses in on the stress and intonation of the phrases. You become quite wordy in your

explanation. You could have made this more student centred after the first e.g. to avoid learners

losing attention. Not sure which phrases the ss are practising. You seem to pace when you're nervous

and this is emphasised when ccqing. As it is t-centred it could have been more effective as a

choral/individual drill. Do you think the ss needed pron practice at this point? Had you noticed

problems?

11.32 better more authoritative control of the classes attention. You need to give clearer instructions

for a drill, nominated or made it choral as your extra practice falls flat.

11.34 instructions for survey. Class divided into two groups. Used one of the stronger ss to

demonstrate. Personalisation. Contextualisation. Hopefully you are not forgetting to note errors as

well as monitor to help to board at the end. As one of the Asian girls was frequently missing out the

'be' in 'be used to' e.g. I used to using pounds.

11.40 you did focus in on the Italian ss misconstruction of the form but gave rather than encouraged

peer or self correction. Lots of communication and interaction the group near me were much quieter

as they were working as one group rather than in separate pairs. You seem genuinely interested in the

ss answers and try and elicit more depth to their answers.

11.45 rapport good. Instructions for information exchange. Encouraged them to stand up and mingle

jokingly. They all moved around and reported the findings of their survey. I assume they have covered

reported speech at this level? Did you contemplate the TL they would need to successfully complete

this activity? Traditional PPP procedure although not much of the controlled practice. I think that was

fine as long as the errors are attended to as they seemed to have grasped the meaning/function well

but there was accuracy issues. The Spanish girl going into great detail about why she is finding it

difficult to get used to eating here because of the lack of familiar ingredients on offer in the

supermarkets. However she was talking about herself rather than reporting on the other people in her

group. Plenty of real communication on a relevant topic.

11.58 whole class feedback rather than the error correction.

Assessment criteria and comments Criterion for pass: Evidence of ability to apply knowledge of language, language teaching methods, resources and factors affecting language acquisition in the planning and delivery of a lesson. As I said at the end of the lesson, I think you were brave to jump straight back into a grammar lesson, so I commend you. You had certainly taken on board Gary’s comments about conveying the function of the grammar point clearly and in a way that students can relate to. You used CCqs effectively and attempted to elicit the language from the students. You had also used all your own material which was appropriate for the level and provided a coherent context throughout and offered plenty of personalisation. In terms of broadening your grammar teaching repertoire, you may want to contemplate other lesson procedures such as task-based or TTT which can immediately move the focus away from the teacher and onto the students. For your final lesson it would be really good to demonstrate some variety of error correction techniques. I know you mentioned that you find it hard to identify errors when they are all speaking, but you may need to get closer with a piece of paper and not get involved in helping or participating in their exchange. Also try and encourage more peer or self correction. This could potentially be related to pronunciation as this was the weakest part of the lesson. If you want to drill students, be firm about it. If you are not sure about the validity of the drill then don’t attempt it. Grade: 55% Signed: Nancy Carter Date: 17/4/15 The checklist below is used by the assessor for feedback and grading purposes (see also descriptors at the end of this proforma). Planning and preparing teaching

Plan contains all required information

Appropriate learning outcome

Understanding of target language

Anticipation of students’ difficulties

Clear and coherent lesson structure

Balance and variety of teaching procedures

Using teaching and learning resources

Materials appropriate for the class

Ability to prepare and adapt materials Teaching and learning activities

Checking of student learning

Techniques for error correction

Concept-checking

Contextualisation

Personalisation

Appropriate accuracy practice

Appropriate balance of TTT and STT

Appropriate communicative practice

Elicitation

Handling linguistic content Managing the learning process

Organisation of the classroom

Sensitivity to learning

Establishing and maintaining rapport

Managing groups, pairs etc.

Promotion of learner autonomy

Adapting the plan when necessary

Appropriate use of gesture etc.

Voice and diction

Ability to use own language appropriately

Giving instructions clearly

Use of technical and other aids

Effective and varied feedback

Management of pace

Creation of a secure and supportive learning environment

Teaching assessment grade descriptors

PASS WITH DISTINCTION 70-100% Teachers must achieve all of the criteria (see module outline for TE315) specified for pass and demonstrate no weaknesses. In addition they must demonstrate exceptional skill/ability in at least two of the specified areas. In post-lesson debriefing they must show a strong ability to evaluate their own teaching.

PASS WITH MERIT 60-69 % Teachers must achieve all of the criteria (as above) for pass and have no serious weaknesses. In addition they must demonstrate exceptional skill/ability in one of the specified areas.

In post-lesson debriefing they must show a strong ability to evaluate their own teaching.

PASS 50-59% Teachers must achieve the majority of the criteria (as above) specified with no serious weaknesses. In post-lesson debriefing they must show some ability to evaluate their own teaching.

FAIL 49% and under Teachers may achieve a majority of the criteria (as above) specified but have serious weaknesses. Teachers may relate well to a class and have (on paper) a well-planned lesson, but the lesson as observed will have failed to achieve its aims and may be inappropriate. In post-lesson debriefing they may not be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the class, but this inability alone is not grounds for failing.