MT Review

The goal of the lesson was the use of countable and uncountable nouns, the students would have to know when to use "How much" and "How many" as well as how to answer a "How much/How many" question by using "a little/ a lot of/some, or a number" when it was appropriate. My class is college students with English levels between the range of Novice Mid - Intermediate low. There is the random student who is either above or below the listed skill levels, but in general, this is the level of student that I usually teach. The Students were told to watch a video clip then answer questions about the video based on both what they saw and what they heard. A few sample questions from the lesson are:, "How many people wore red?" and "How much hair did an actor (Freddie bender) have?" There were also questions which covered previous topics which were covered in earlier classes (What was the woman's first name?)



I was very unhappy with how my micro-teaching went last week, and I was even less thrilled with it after reviewing the recording.  For one, I didn't like the amount of Ttalk that I did during the presentation.  Usually in my classes, I have the students engage each other more then what I displayed during the MT and I definitely should have showed this during my presentation.    Unfortunately due to the 9 minute time limit, I was more concerned on getting the task at hand accomplished as opposed to demonstrating how I teach.  This should not had been a consideration since Tom repeatedly told us what the goals were for the MT (which is demonstrating skill, not finishing the task).  Another thing that I noticed is that I didn't  use the WB.  Again, I was to hung up on sticking to what I wrote in the LP as opposed to demonstrating what I normally do in class, and in the LP, I made no mention to WB use.   Thus, How can i be  accurately assessed for a grade if I don't demonstrate what I actually do?    I need to DISPLAY that I do INDEED use the WB OFTEN in class, and I need to as well cut down on my Ttalk as well.  Also, the choral repetition I used in the MT was random, their was no planning ahead of when it would be needed and the students may not recognize WHY particular  phrases were repeated. Another thing I noticed is that I could have corrected the student mistakes more efficiently and  I discussed this with  very same issue with Tom after class.  You will notice that I when a student made a mistake I would not correct them, what I did instead was rephrase what they said with the correct English.  My goal in doing this was to ensure that a student's affective filter would not be raised by pointing out their errors, however, after I inquired about the issue with Tom, he informed me that I could had used a chunking technique so that students notice that their was an error as opposed to just rephrasing the student's reply in it's correct form.  When i rephrased  the reply, some students are aware of the error (as you saw Tracie self correct her error) while other may not be aware an error was made.  Finally, I didn't like the fact that I allowed some of the students to give only one word responses. Again, since starting STG i have been very conscious not to allow one word replies from my students when I am actually teaching, but again, how can I be accurately assessed if I don't show this during my Micro-Teaching.

One of the few things I did think went "ok" was how I engaged the students. I wasn't JUST concerned about  looking for the "right grammatical answer" every time a student replied, as I was actually showing that I was interested in what they said, not just HOW they said it.   In turn, the conversations (with the students) seemed more genuine as opposed to having an English lesson.  That being said, I need to find a better balance between keeping the students affective filter lowered, while at the same time making sure that the class is engaged in a productive lesson in which the "i+1" approach is used.  I also feel as though I tried to involve all the students, since there was pair work, and I tried to include as much as the class as possible while still trying to get the listening portion of the lesson started.  One must balance their time, and when 2 minutes is needed for the listening exercise, that only leaves 7 to get other tasks done.

Since the lesson was indeed a Listening practice, perhaps I am being a bit to hard on myself,and again, 9 minutes does not a accurately display a what is actually being done ina 2 our class... however, I can't help but to notice the  many Many areas in which I still need improvement.  I will concede the fact that my teaching style has changed/improved immensely since the beginning of the semester, and I am happy with my progress.  However, with that being said, there is still a long road ahead, and I need to PROVE that I am capable of the teaching abilities that I claim I have, as opposed to just THINKING that I have them.

my First Micro Teaching Vs The Second Micro Teaching... Lets get ready to rumble...


I actually liked how my first Micro Teaching went when compared to the second go round. I elicited answers from my students, I used the WB, every student was involved, and there seemed to be a better understanding from my students as to what I was teaching. Also, the interaction between the students and myself "may have" seemed less conversational in the first Micro Teaching, since I tended to correct students mistakes more often, which in turn may have raised their affective filter, however, I don't feel as though I solely focused on HOW the students used grammar, as I paid attention to what they said, and gave them honest conversational replies when they talked and corrected them when it was needed. Although, I dio have to be careful how I point out mistakes to ensure that the students don't "lose face", which may result in students losing interest in learning English. Finally I feel as though my use of choral repetition was more organized in the first Micro teaching, and there was a purpose when I used choral repetition. However, the main difference between the first Micro Teaching and the second was that the first Micro Teaching was a speaking exercise, where as the second Miro Teaching was a listening exercise. The first Micro Teaching was also the "preview" stage of the lesson, where as the second Micro teaching was the presentation stage. I do feel comfortable with how I set up the preview stage of the day, since I allow the students to interact with their classmates, as well as with me. The negatives from the first Micro teaching are as follows:
TTalk. (to much Ttalk)
Organization (or a lack there of)
A sloppy use of the WB.
I over-corrected my students' mistakes, which in turn raised their affective filter.

I realize that I can improve in many areas and in the second Micro Teaching and I feel as though my teaching ability slipped when compared to the first go round. As you can imagine, this is quite disappointing. In the future I will be mindful to combine the positives from the 2 Micro Teachings, while at the same time I will use Exploratory Practice to form habits which help me cut down on the negatives.