Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

Guy Lloyd 9712761109 ED 3101 (PD) 1-4pm Wed 21st April 1999 Micro Teaching Report: The overall

lesson seemed to develop well although I did exceed the time limit. This was caused by interchanging of to much technology within the teaching room, I also did not watch the time well. The critical friend did inform me of time, but I seemed to get a little carried away with the lesson. My time management had been discussed with critical friend prior to the lesson on two occasions and other issues within the lesson plan. This however did not work in the actual lesson, I feel that the time management aspect of lesson planning will have to be analysed more closely. The unpredictability and unknown human behavior factors within the lesson, cannot be predicted until the actual lesson is in progress. Once my lesson was in progress, I tried to micro reflect on each little scenario which occurred within the lesson. This gave me continual feedback of the lessons progression and my peers reaction to it. The group used was small and I feel that this lesson on teamwork may have worked better with a larger group. The reaction cards for each team member had definitive roles, to be acted out in the team environment, only four of these cards could be used. This showed me that flexibility and the ability to adapt to the situation as a facilitator are important. The amount of information and activity to be assessed in this lesson was extensive and the time limit, unfortunately only allowed shallow coverage. Consequently the lesson was a little rushed, this I feel left my peers a little confused about the whole lesson objective. The discussion part of the lesson only allowed minimal interaction and I would have liked to spend more time on this reflective process. This would have allowed discussion on team work and its implications for the classroom and my peers. I had to give this discussion to my peers for homework which hopefully will give me some feedback on learnt material. The techniques and strategies used within the lesson were based mainly on interaction with reflection. This allowed me to ascertain the amount of learning taking place. Unfortunately I did not have time to have open discussion on the subject matter, due to time constraints. I feel that the if I had allowed more time in the discussion area, it could have been more indicative of how the lesson provided knowledge on team work. On viewing the video at a later stage, it was evident that I had made some mistakes in the way I produced the lesson and taught it. I feel that these issues should not be taken as failure but be used as indicators to further reflection and critical analysis for further lesson plans. I have asked for input from the critical friend and for a report which we decided would be an excellent reference from someone who did not interact with the lesson, but was an observer. The lesson was based on constructive learning, however I did not appreciate the time this style of teaching can command. I believe in constructivist theory and enjoy the implications and feedback that come from this form of teaching with peers. The strengths of the lesson I believe were its interactivity and involvement. It steered away from transmission teaching as far as possible and this was the objective. The filming of my peers as they worked with the teamwork scenario, gave myself and peers an insight into how we work as a team. Some interesting theories were discussed about the filming and reflection and this was my objective. Hayles a theorist we studied last year, explained that we react differently when we are aware that we are being analysed even sub consciously. Therefore filming my peers in an unaware state proved positive. This was evidenced my their reactions when I replayed the footage of them working as a team. The weaknesses include my time management and the inability to get people working quickly in a small group, which was the overall objective. I possibly should have explained in more detail the roles and responsibilities of teamwork before commencing the practical scenario. Future action and planning will allow me to focus more on the areas where I am weak and should in the long term provide a more definitive and productive lesson. The learning experience of the lesson has been enjoyable and I look forward to more extensive ways of conducting teaching.

Guy Lloyd 9712761109 ED 3101 (pd)

Teaching Plan: Theory: I choose the topic and decided that it would be important, because my colleagues and I have not experienced the importance of teamwork. Through the course at the university we have all worked solely on projects, until this course which is making individuals work more closely. Therefore I decided that a lesson on teamwork would be beneficial to all. It fits with my belief of teaching as at sometime we all have to work in a team environment. The team work scenario can fit into various aspects of life and to show the importance of this would be beneficial to my colleagues in future work in the university. The prospect of further teamwork and friendly criticism within study is inevitable, therefore I wanted to enhance skills already learnt through some subjects studied. Nature of the lesson: The lesson was aimed at team work and its importance. The lesson tried to allow what I would call, absolute constructivism in that I wanted my colleagues to really think for themselves and assess themselves, which was a large task. It fits with other learning in mathematics study and theories learnt in developmental psychology. The resources required were extensive and the critical friend played an important role in the production of videos for reflection and time feedback for the lesson. Purposes, Aims and Objectives: The learning outcomes that I intended for the lesson were that my colleagues would understand the implications and theories behind teamwork and its advantages in the university, school and for their future pupils, in a school environment. Some of this information was gained however due to time restrictions I feel that I only skimmed the surface. Intended processes: The lesson went as planned but as I did not manage the time well it exceeded the allocated slot for this lesson. I felt that I did not need to write all the words that I would be saying in the lesson and relied more on the micro reflection of reactions, gestures and knowledge my peers seemed to be attaining, I do not know if this was a good strategy at this stage?. Each step in the lesson was marked and timed, but once the lesson was in progression it proved difficult to rigidly stay on track with time and management issues. Evaluation: This took place throughout the lesson and also at the end where my peers are going to bring some form of reflection on team work into next weeks lesson, I can then assess this information to gain some understandings of what learnings took place. I have also watched the video on three occasions and have gained some knowledge by reflection, on issues within the lesson which will be changed to accentuate the points which I felt were really necessary for understanding.

Guy Lloyd 9712761109 ED 3101 (pd)

Вам также может понравиться