11/29 Readings

References: Anthology, Chap. 3 and Kuma Chap. 13

Chapter 3 in Anthology refers to the process of lesson planning on the part of English language teacher; it discusses past and present models of lesson plans and how to implement them in the language classroom. According to Farrell, "Planning daily lessons is the end result of a complex planning process that includes the yearly, term and unit plans. A daily lesson is a written description of how students will move toward attaining specific objectives" (pg. 30). Daily lesson plans, in my opinion, are something that we as pre-service teachers groan about; they take a long time to put together and especially at the college level, it is hard to write lesson plans when we are not in our own classroom in a specific school district with their own specific standards. I see daily lesson planning more as guidelines for learning; it is really important to not have adhere to that lesson plan and the times set down on it, because that can hinder the learning process. "After they (pre-service teachers) graduate, many teachers give up writing lesson plans" (pg. 31), and I can see why. If the school is not going to require us to write them every day, we probably will not. I do not know of many teachers who still write detailed lesson plans; they have told me that they write a general outline with the times and they just go from there. I feel that a successful lesson does not mean it is perfectly and exactly like one you wrote; some learning can be put aside for more important matters, but of course that depends on the school, as well. If you are hired at a school that wants a lesson plan from you every day, then that is what you must do to keep your job, but I have not heard of this happening a lot after the first year of teaching. I think they should observe us as much as possible and give constructive criticism instead of going solely by our lesson plans. Yes I do know logistically it is difficult, but if a school wants good teachers, they have to put the effort into it.

The generic lesson plan layout on pg. 33, "perspective (opening), stimulation, instruction/participation, closure, follow-up" is something that we see very frequently in teaching. The third phase, instruction and participation, obviously should be the longest and the most influential on the lesson. This is where the learning takes place, and also closure should be something very focused on in the lesson, as well, because it is necessary to make sure students know what they got out of that day's lesson. The day has been counterproductive if they feel they have not learned anything. Additionally, something I have been taught and have noticed in my observations is the idea of having an end product, something concrete that they can take home from school or from the lesson. At least then they have something to think about, and they have something that they use for studying for a quiz or exam in the future. "No teacher's guide can anticipate what problems might occur during a lesson" (pg. 34) accurately describes what I was talking about earlier; we cannot have rigid lesson plans in which there is no room for change of pace or any sort of change at all. At the same time, it is a delicate balance because we cannot allow too much freedom for the students, either; we have to find a way to keep them engaged with their work but make them feel like they have some control over their learning.

I think having closure or follow-up questions like "What do you think the students actually learned?" or "What changes (if any) will you make in your teaching and why (or why not)?" (pg. 35) are important for a teacher's daily reflection on the lesson. We have been taught in our Curriculum and Instruction classes that reflection is the basis for learning how to improve and hone our teaching skills; we need to write down what worked, what did not work, what activities the students liked or did not like, among a plethora of other things. Daily reflection is difficult to do unless asked in school; I do not know a lot of teachers who have the time for it. I think more like a weekly reflection would be more manageable; doing it on a Friday after school for example. I do not know what works best for other people, but I am the kind of person who likes to take one time out for something like that, and it is not every day that I can do it which makes this plan better for myself, at least.

Kuma Chapter 13, "Monitoring Teaching Acts", deals with the practice of 'monitoring' oneself through classroom occurrences and therefore 'monitoring' how we teach. There are two types of observation models he describes: product-oriented and process-oriented. Product-oriented models of observation "are based on the assumption that a description of teacher behavior is necessary in order to build a classroom behavior profile of the teacher" and "use a finite set of preselected and predetermined categories for describing certain verbal behaviors" (pg. 287). On the other hand, process-oriented models of observation "are based on the assumption that an interpretation of classroom activities is necessary in order to understand classroom processes and practices" and "focus on classroom input as well as interaction" (pg. 288). While both models have limitations, I think they both have their merit in classroom observation. Which model works for what teacher greatly depends on the type of teacher they are and what they want to accomplish by their classroom observations. It also depends on the focus of that particular unit or lesson that they are teaching; if they are doing something more hands-on or something that includes debate or discussion, they would be more inclined to use a process-oriented model. If they are teaching a lesson or unit that is more grammar-based or lecture-based that includes a lot of busy work or homework, then a product-oriented would be more appropriate in that case. I would think it is good to have a healthy balance of both in classroom observation and not to adhere to one model in particular, and I think that is what Kuma is trying to say by pointing out their limitations. Just like teaching methodology, there is no one perfect or correct answer to the way of doing classroom observation.

Kuma instead suggests a observation tool that "offer[s] them open-ended possibilities and user-friendly procedures for self-observing, self-analyzing, and self-evaluating" (pg. 289), and I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment. I know that I had a harder time doing classroom observations for my college courses when they were too specific on what they wanted; I really much preferred my one professor's way; she merely had categories like "instruction" or "assessment" and focusing on broader types like that instead of discussing one specific formative assessment or something like that, because honestly, one never knows what they are going to see in a classroom. An observer may not see a quiz being administered that day or a grammar lesson being taught; we should have a system that is more open to what our opinions and feelings are instead of being too narrow and specific. Something important in our own self-evaluation is having the opinion of our students in the equation, as well. We are teaching them, after all; why should not they have an opinion in their own learning process? I feel like when I was a student I never got to choose anything about my education; it felt amazing my senior year when I could actually go to my guidance counselor and pick two elective courses I wanted to take. We do not get that feeling of independence until we are in college, and I think that high schoolers deserve that opportunity to choose. I know that that is something I am a huge advocate of for my classroom. I want my students to be able to have choices in what they do for projects. I know I am always going to be learning from them, and so should other teachers, no matter how long they have been teaching.

Kuma's "M&M procedure" (macrostrategies/mismatch) is an observational scheme that is set up in three stages which are accomplished in ten steps. In Step 1, the teacher recruits another teacher to observe a lesson or unit, which I think is a step in the right direction. It is important to have a colleague evaluate you because it is less nerve-wracking than an administrator. In Steps 2 and 3, the teacher clarifies any lesson objectives with the other observing teacher, which is a useful step. I feel like a lot of observers walk in feeling a bit blind and lost when they come in the class, especially if it is not their subject area; something that is beneficial is also having someone in your content area observe you, but I know this is difficult if you are the only ESL teacher in the school, for example. In Steps 4 and 5, the observer watches the lesson or unit and then the teacher watches their video and asks themselves questions like "Are there learner-learner exchange of ideas? What part of my instruction has been successful or unsuccessful?" etc (pg. 293). I am not exactly sure what the obsession with being videotaped is right now, because we have to be videotaped for our methods class. I suppose it is beneficial to see yourself teaching, but it is so self-conscious. I always feel like I am going to see things I do not like about myself, and that these are little quirks that I cannot change. In a way, I prefer to know how I can approve, but at the same time, it is intimidating to have a camera in the room. I feel like I could not be myself.
Steps 6, 7, and 8 are mainly about discussing the teacher and learner acts and what can be done to change or improve their learning strategies. I think it is an excellent idea to include the students in this observational process so that they feel like have a say in what is going on in their classroom. I think it would be cool for them to watch the video as well so that they can point out anything you or the observer may have missed along the way. More viewpoints are always better in this process. Steps 9 and 10 are merely the implementation of these new strategies, and I think something that Kuma should include is another step. I would suggest that the same observing teacher come in again in a few weeks and see how these measures or strategies are being implemented in the classroom, and if they are, are they improving the classroom environment or hindering it? I think that would be very interesting to see.