Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

The two teachers during my observations for this class were Mrs.

Bridgett Ott,
history teacher, and Mrs. Diane Pointer, science teacher at Crossville High School.
Mrs. Ott and Mrs. Pointer had different teaching styles, but they both exhibited
proficiency in their fields. Each teacher exhibited support of cultural differences
inside the classroom; however, their collaborations with others were very different.
Mrs. Ott, who had been teaching history for fourteen years, was more involved
with all teachers in the history department. They collaborated with each other in
presenting lessons, subject matter, and hands on activities to promote meaningful
understanding of history and why it had happened. Mrs. Ott posted objectives that
she wanted the students to know from her lectures, videos, and PowerPoints
because she felt the history book did not cover vital information the students
needed. She began classes by explaining what, where, and why the information in
history was important to them to know as students. During planning she spoke of
trips that she had taken to different history teaching seminars to help engage all
students and the benefits of project learning.
Mrs. Pointer, who had been teaching science for over twenty years, (in that she
did not want to be specific), was not really involved with other science teachers,
with the exception of Mrs. Emily Moore. Both teachers did collaborate on science lab
experiments and techniques to use in the lab. Mrs. Pointer described her
professional development as learning through her own interests. She did not
elaborate on county professional development; however, she did talk about being
part of young adults team who travel abroad during the summer, and an extended
time with scientists at the Dolphin Island Sea Lab.
Both teachers did talk about the huge cultural diversity in the school. The school
and county had provided various workshops to explore Hispanic culture, family
units, and provided meaningful learning experiences for those students. Their
biggest problem seemed to be communications with the Hispanic students. Nether
teacher spoke Spanish, but assured me that they did know some of the common
words, and most all of the foul words. Mrs. Ott and Mrs. Pointer tried through my
observations to provide extra assistance to those students who did have language
barriers.
During these observations I found the two classrooms to be uniquely different.
Both classrooms were set up in straight line rows except when the teachers allowed
them to work in pairs, or groups of three. Mrs. Ott provided a more casual
experience than did Mrs. Pointer. As a facilitator of learning Mrs. Ott involved the
students in critical thinking skill and provided feedback to redirect if the students
got off course. While Mrs. Pointer was very efficient in making sure the students
understood the content, there was very little critical thinking required. Mrs. Pointer
knew her material well, but I did not see very much student lead interactions. Both
teachers provided graphic organizers, handouts, and material to go along with
lesson; however, modifications were only done on testing material. Talking, writing,

investigating, reading, and listening were not combined on a daily basis. Mrs. Ott
did do several different lessons that provided visual and hands on activities but
reading was almost void. Mrs. Ott presented the material well, but the students had
to depend on their notes, there was not any extra reading material available. Mrs.
Pointer provided textbooks, lab materials, but learning groups were used specifically
for project based lessons in her classroom. While both teacher are very efficient and
knowledge in their fields the students were basically told what to do, how to do it,
and not given time to investigate and decide for themselves. Modifications for the
language learners consisted of students who sat close by to translate directions
from both teachers. Language learners assignments were the same as English
speakers.
The assessments provided by both teachers were basically quiz type that
involved fill in the blank, true or false, and multiple choices. Discussion questions,
pictures, and drawings were not utilized in either class. Mrs. Ott did not have any
special needs students; therefore, modifications were not used. Mrs. Pointer did
have one special needs student, but the modifications that she chose to utilize were
to use the same test with a given selection on which questions to answer. Both
teachers use technology in the classroom by using a program called clickers. Mrs.
Pointer especially likes to use these before a. test as a review. Each student is given
a remote, she controls the monitor, a question is reflected on the white board for
sixty seconds, and then the student has sixty seconds to choose A, B, C, or D. After
the sixty seconds it tells what percent of the students got the answer correct. Both
teachers used this and stated that it provides them with feedback on what the
students know or dont know. Another program both teachers are using Global
Scholars, which is a program supported by the Department of Education.
The classroom environment during observation proved to be quiet different in
Mrs. Otts and Mrs. Pointers. Mrs. Otts classroom was more relaxed compared to
Mrs. Pointers classroom. I think that the difference was more about classroom
management styles. Mrs. Pointer held students to a strict routine with no variances.
At times she did converse with different students about plans for upcoming school
events, but maintained complete control and direction of the conversations. Mrs. Ott
started her classes by asking the students about their day or the school activities
they had attended. Mrs. Ott questioned some of the Hispanic students about their
plans for soccer games in their community. Both teachers exhibited respect for all
students, and most students showed respect for them.
In the classroom both teachers exhibited thoughtful questioning on content,
giving language learners a bit more time to reply. All students were included in
classroom questioning, and both teachers were skillful in correcting their thinking
for incorrect answers. Mrs. Ott always asked the students why they thought their
answer was correct, while Mrs. Pointer corrected an incorrect answer by asking
them to turn to the page in the textbook and reread the information. Groups were
not utilized daily in either classroom. Mrs. Ott on a couple of occasions would let

them team up to work on a skill sheet. Both teachers moved about the classroom
without teaching from their desk. They did utilize a podium for lecturing. Mrs. Ott
used technology in the form of videos and PowerPoint. She used what she called
chunking when viewing videos. She would show the video for a few minutes, and
then would ask questions from that part of the segment.
The technology that was used during my observations involved laptops to
research on the Civil War. Mrs. Ott positioned herself to the back of the room so she
had a birds eye view of all monitors. She also informed me that the county blocked
most social media sites, and the librarian had a program where if informed of use
she could quickly view all laptops in Mrs. Otts classroom to check what the students
were viewing. Mrs. Pointer stated that she had used a virtual dissecting program
with her students but preferred doing hands on dissecting. Previously stated both
teachers loved using clickers and used them frequently. Students were not
scheduled computer time; therefore, it was left up to the teachers to reserve either
the laptops or the computer lab when they wanted to incorporate technology.
Professional development was usually about language learners and how to help
students succeed in graduating. I was most impressed by the teachers willingness
to acquire professional development on their own for their respected fields. Each
teacher did spend time during summer break to attend some sort of seminar;
however, the county provided various professional development at the beginning of
school, after fall break, after Christmas break, and before testing. They each
received training on the new testing procedures and how to prepare students to
succeed. After testing they were given time to review scores, which helped them to
direct their teaching to needed areas of content. Mrs. Ott and Mrs. Pointer both
stated they did one major project each term to help students understand more
about research, writing what they had learned, and how to create visuals to show
prove their learning process.
Both educators presented lessons in various venues, through videos,
PowerPoints, clickers, hands on activities, and graphic organizers. Their instruction
was precise and direct. The students prior knowledge was accessed before
presentation of new material; however, one of the items on my check list, figure
things out, was not something that I viewed during every visit. Students did have
writing journals to write their information down. I did not view students writing
reflections about their learning. The teacher used more of a ticket out method
than giving them time to reflect on the lesson. The teacher would ask them to either
define a word, name one thing they learned, or one thing that didnt understand
and leave on their desk as they exited the classroom for their next class. Mrs. Ott
and Mrs. Pointer both took time to look over these ticket out (post-it notes) notes,
but I did not observe them use them in the classroom.
During my observations I feel that Mrs. Otts teaching method proved that the
more comfortable the environment it is for the students, the easier it is to learn.

Mrs. Pointers teaching method was stricter, but it seemed to work almost as well as
Mrs. Otts teaching method. In my opinion Mrs. Otts teaching method was student
friendly. Since Mrs. Ott made her classroom a comfortable environment for her
students, it promoted better behavior and more focus on the task at hand rather
than what might have been going wrong in their personal lives. Mrs. Pointers strict
method worked, but it is just not the way I would want to conduct my classroom. At
times her stricter method would prove to be a hassle to those that exhibited
troubled behavior. Mrs. Otts students were always prepared and eager to be in her
classroom, while Mrs. Pointers students were not as happy to be learning science.
The one thing I have learned through these observations is classroom
environment is important to the learning experience. Respect must be given to all
students to receive respect in return. An educator must have student friendly rules,
and an environment that promotes learning. Students must be given many different
venues to promote critical thinking, time to reflect, and connect to the world around
them.

Вам также может понравиться