Microteach

Peer Evaluation of Ken Semper Ken Sempers lesson was based on teaching vocabulary on jobs in the French language. It was a very interesting lesson to observe as he used different techniques to portray meaning of the target language. The lesson was successful and consisted of many strengths. However, areas of developments were also apparent. One of the strengths of Ken’s lesson was that the aims and objectives of the lesson were clear. The aims and objectives were clearly discussed in the beginning of the lesson so the learners understood what they were going to learn in the lesson and what they will be able to do by the end of the lesson. The aims were………… * Students learn vocabulary of jobs in French and ask and answer questions about jobs. The objectives were… * Students will be able to identify and say the names of 5 jobs. * Students will be able to ask and answer questions relating to names of jobs. What is this' Is this a…' * Use cognates to read and identify descriptions of different jobs. The context was presented very well in relation to the topic. Visuals related to France such as wine, bread, Eiffel tower etc. were presented on smart board. Learners were given the opportunity to elicit information and discuss what they saw and how the images were related to France. My peer then presented the pictures of jobs on the smart board. Effective drilling method was used such as choral, group and individual drilling. There was continuous assessment of vocabulary throughout the lesson, this allowed the teacher to check learners pronunciation and correct where needed. Demonstrations were also given before task to ensure learners knew exactly what to do and what was expected of them. Activities were also well planned such as gap fill exercises and learners were encouraged to work in pairs to encourage peer learning and assessment. “In group work, students’ opinions are being valued and accepted; In teacher talk they are being ignored.” G.Petty p232 (2009) Interactive activities were also given were students were able to use the smart board to create a different dimension to the lesson as opposed to predominantly working from paper. Differentiation methods were well planned where the teacher was able to identify the stronger learners and the weaker learners. Stronger learners where given extended activities and more difficult questions to challenge themselves. This strategy is ensured to cater for the needs of all learners as Petty states that.. “Differentiation is adopting strategies that ensure success in Learning for all, by accommodating individual differences of any Kind.” G.Petty p587 (2009) The tasks were relevant to the topic with clear linking stages of each task. The lesson consisted of good skills development of speaking, listening and reading, it was measurable and specific. It was successful lessons as at the end of the micro teach, the teacher recapped on the objectives. This made it easier for the teacher as well as the learners to asses whether the students have completed and had achieved the lesson outcome as planned. Although the lesson was successful, some areas of development were also apparent. One area of the target language that could be improved is to differentiate between two sentences that are similar. The two sentences were qu’est que c’est and est-que c’est. Some of the learners where unsure of the difference in meaning and how to pronounce these sentences correctly. Therefore, drilling the sentences and demonstrating the difference in sound and meaning were needed to insure pronunciation and understanding. However, although drilling is a very effective method of assessing the learners pronunciation at some parts during the drilling of the individual words consisted of too much correction for those learners who where weaker. It’s important not to over correct as this may deflate the learners. It may be a good idea to go back to the learner at a later time during the lesson and correct pronunciation. Finally, the last area of development may be debateable. A worksheet was given to the learners where they were given sentences to read in French and guess the profession. Some may argue this worksheet was too difficult as the teacher may have had high expectation of the learners prior knowledge of the French language as the lesson was aimed at beginners. On the other hand, many of the words in French was in relation to the English language such as pain(bread) vino (wine) which made it easier for learners to understand along with the target language itself which has already been practiced. The teacher did not require learners to fully understand every single word of the sentences but just identify certain words to help them identify each profession. The micro teach was very beneficial to me as a learner as well as an observer. My peer has given me ideas on interesting techniques of teaching where I will in no doubt be incorporating in my future lessons. Bibliography Petty, G. (2009) teaching today: A Practical Guide. A Practical Guide 4th edn.Cheltenham. Nelson Thormes Ltd.