Szekeres 1

Classroom observation paper Author: Gábor Szekeres

Programme: MA in TEFL

Academic year: 2014-2015 Autumn

Course: Classroom techniques

Szekeres 2

Focuses and aims:

In the past few decades an increasing interest has been paid to language learning motivation in

the field of language teaching. Motivation has been recognized as one of the key factors to

active and productive classroom work and successful language learning altogether. In this

paper I am going to analyze an EFL lesson critically to highlight how motivation works in an

L2 classroom and what can and what should teachers do to get their students to do their best.

My observation paper has numerous focal points (classroom atmosphere, teacher personality,

behavior, rapport with the students, motivation and attitudes in general, etc.), because as it is

going to become apparent, all these points have a role to play in increasing student

motivation.

Literature review:

The primary theoretical base of my classroom observation paper is Zoltán Dörnyei’s Teaching

and Researching Motivation, which summarises recent mainstream ideas about motivation

research in general and how the results of these researches can be implemented in L2

classrooms.

According to Dörnyei: ‘the most educational researchers can do at present is to raise

teachers’ ‘motivational awareness.’’ What he means by this is that many findings of

motivational research is too vague, situational or generalized and it is questionable whether

these findings can be translated into educational recommendations or not. Most teachers have

to come up with their own strategies to affect language learner motivation based on the

language learning situation and the individual differences of the learners themselves. The

problem is that there are teachers who have not yet realized or considered that their teaching

could be made much more effective if they started consciously working on their students’

motivation. This is what Dörnyei means by “teachers’ ‘motivational awareness.’’

Szekeres 3

Dörnyei also quotes Stipek (1996:85) about the importance of classroom-specific

motives, which means that although every student varies in terms of motivation, the

immediate learning environment, that is class atmosphere, the teacher, the teaching

methodology strongly affects this ‘motivational baggage.’

In Teaching and Researching Motivation there are four educationally motivated

motivational constructs presented. These psychological models are not going to be described

in detail in this paper, for further reference see Chapter 4 in Dörnyei’s book. It should be

mentioned though that these psychological constructs ‘can (and should) be seen as

organizational frameworks designed to help to get oriented among the plethora of of

motivational influences relevant in the language classroom.’ They can make teachers think

about the importance of motivation in L2 learning, which is the first step towards

incorporating these ideas into their teaching principles and afterwards techniques and

strategies may be designed which may help them in their professional work.

During my classroom observation it was apparent to me that teacher whose lesson I

visited had a deep understanding about her students’ motivations towards learning English in

general. She was able to address most students on the micro level (Crooks and Schmidt

Theory, Dörnyei 2001), that is could keep the students focused on English language learning.

Meanwhile, as it became clear after exchanging a few words with her before and after the

lesson, she also kept in mind the long-term goals presented by the curriculum which basically

was analogous with the needs of her students. This goal is a successful school leaving exam.

I have also relied on Diane Larsen-Freeman’s Techniques and Principles in Language

Teaching so as to be able to identify the methodology (the direct method) the teacher adhered

to during class.

The context of the research:

Szekeres 4

The observation was conducted in Mihály Babits Gyakorló Iskola és Szki in Pécs, in

November 28. 2014. The lesson was 45 minutes long and there were 10 students in class

altogether (one of which arrived later). Although all of them were 12th graders, the groupd was

mixed, students came from two different classes. The situation was unique too, as students

from one of the constituent classes were supposed to be out of town on a school excursion. It

should be noted though that some of them skipped the excursion in favor of the English

lesson.

At the time of the observation the students and the teacher have already had four

lessons that they. Fatigue was ought to have its mark on everybody, but still students

remained attentive.

Research questions:

1. How did the teacher behave and what kinds of strategies did she employ to affect her

students’ language learning motivation?

2. How did the students respond to classroom-specific motives?

Data collection:

Data was collected via focused classroom observation conducted in a Hungarian secondary

grammar school. It should be noted that the school (Babits) is prestigious has close ties with

the University of Pécs. Teachers in training often do their practice there, in-service teachers

and students are accustomed to being observed. Other than me, there was only one other

teacher in training who observed this very same class. Our presence there did not have a

strong effect on the normal course of the lesson.

The lesson started at 11:50 and lasted 45 minutes on Friday. The students were all

tired. 10 students were observed (5 females, 5 males) and all of them were 12th graders.

Szekeres 5

Before the lesson I had the chance to speak a few words with the teacher. From

previous contact I knew that she has more than 15 years of professional experience. She told

me that the group is not one of her most highly motivated groups and that their main goal is to

prepare for the school-leaving exam in English language. She also told me that curriculum is

based on their coursebook.

Procedures:

The observed English lesson is going to be analyzed in a linear order, based on the notes I

took during my observation. A high emphasis is given to student-teacher interaction,

classroom atmosphere, observed student motivation and other factors I deem relevant to the

aim of the research paper.

I am going to progress task by task through the lesson and I am going to make

comments and references based on the primary theoretical resource of this paper, Teaching

and Researching Motivation.

Results:

The language of the lesson was English from the first moment on. The teacher rarely reverted

back to Hungarian, only to quickly give the Hungarian equivalent for some advanced pieces

of vocabulary (e.g. adjacent, vicinity) and only if no one could deduce the meaning of these

words from context. The teacher also tried to teach advanced vocabulary via examples with

synonyms and antonyms of the given word and most of the time she succeeded in doing so,

Hungarian was only used as a last resort.

It is important to use English during the lesson and to make the students use it too,

because it reinforces their belief in the teacher’s command of the language and makes them

trust that the teacher is indeed somebody they can learn it from. Also their belief in their own

Szekeres 6

abilities is reinforced if they can witness the extent of their command over the language

throughout the lesson.

The students also used English predominantly, they rarely needed to be reminded that

they should be using the target language. The teaching method was mainly frontal so the

teacher immediately became aware of any non-English speech in class.

At the very beginning of the lesson students were told to sit apart from each other.

Personally I found this surprising at first, but it turned out to be a good move as it kept

students away from off-topic conversation. All attention was given to learning and also,

surprisingly none of the students objected to the teacher’s command. Disciplining was rarely

an issue later on. The teacher was very well-established, she had a set of sophisticated,

working strategies to keep her students from misbehaving. E.g. she would stop talking when

she heard that someone was talking when he was not supposed to, and she would stare at him

for a few seconds silently. This usually worked, although at about 10 minutes into the lesson

she had to scold one of her students: “Balázs, you are being impolite and I hate it.”

Generally classroom atmosphere was relaxed and non-threatening. The teacher dealt

with arising problematic situations diplomatically, she was open-minded and kind, which

made the students reciprocate her attitude towards the learning situation. They did their best to

pay attention and some of them were quite actively participating in teacher-student

discussions even though they were tired.

According to Dörnyei, ‘motivational strategies cannot be employed in a ‘motivational

vacuum’’, there are some conditions that need to be present, basic motivational conditions

have to be created. ‘These conditions are:

1) appropriate teacher behaviors and a good relationship with students

2) a pleasant and supporting classroom atmosphere

Szekeres 7

3) a cohesive learner group with appropriate group norms’ (Dörnyei 2001)

In this case, all these conditions could be observed, the group could work well and effectively,

there was not any time wasted.

This claim is well exemplified by a problematic situation which occurred about at 10

minutes into the lesson. A student arrived late to class, while the group was checking

homework. The teacher immediately realized that he looked obviously distracted and

fatigued. She decided to let the student join in without a bad word or punishment. She only

engaged the student in a quick conversation in English to set him in the mood and to enquire

about his howabouts, but then she resumed work with the group and she let the latecomer sit

down where he wanted to sit.

This attention to details and ease of problemsolving tells a lot about how well-

established the group is and how well the teacher knows her students and how to deal with

them. The validity of this example is going to be further strengthened later on in connection

with the very same student.

At about halfway into the lesson, during a speaking activity the teacher was asking

some students about the problems they have encountered at their homes and how they

repaired these problems. After a while she tried questioning the student who came late, but the

student did not understand the questions. The teacher tried rephrasing the questions and

explaining the context in case the student was not paying attention, but it did not help either.

He was obviously very tired and he lacked focus. Maybe this would have discouraged some

teachers, but in this case the teacher was obstinate and without hesitation she asked the

student for the reason of his tiredness. She did not give up and she was able to get an

explanation in English: the student was practicing making cocktails for a job as a mixer. The

explanation was quite lengthy, complex and entertaining at the same time. The student

Szekeres 8

produced a few target language sentences for practice and the group got a short break away

from the main topic of the lesson while still practicing their listening skill. There teacher did

not make a fuss about the student’s inability to answer the first questions, there was no anger

or tension and the problem was solved productively. The teacher could have chosen to scold

or punish the student, but she did not do so, because the motivational potential of praise and

encouragement is much more effective in teaching. Also, one of the key issues of quality

learning experience is the student’s social image. According to Dörnyei (2001): ‘Maintaining

face is a central concern for most school children.’ Students should not be belittled or

humiliated in front of their peers, because it reduces their enthusiasm towards the learning

situation itself.

Another interesting aspect of the observed lesson was the teacher’s use of praise and

rewards. It seemed natural that the teacher thanked students for their contributions during

speaking activities, which must have boosted their motivation towards productivity, because

the teacher made them feel that their answers were appreciated. Also, it seemed that the

teacher had a well-established system of rewards.

The teacher offered a ‘+’ mark twice during the lesson. The first time was before the

students started a gap-filling exercise in their coursebooks. The student who was able to solve

the exercise without mistakes was promised to get the ‘+’ mark. Unfortunately I was not able

to observe the motivational force behind the teacher’s rewards, because she forgot about it

and the lesson went on. It was not clear whether any of the students had any mistakes, because

there was no feedback after they had finished checking the exercise. I asked the teacher about

this after the lesson had ended and she told me that she was certain that the students would

remind her about the promised reward if any of them had earned it, because they usually do

so. She told me that they do not forget about rewards, because they consider it valuable and

important thing.

Szekeres 9

Conclusions:

Generally the teacher was successful at keeping the students focused on English learning

during the lesson. This was reinforced by her positive and reassuring attitude towards her

students and the learning situation. The group was able to go on with the planned learning

material, because there was not much need for disciplining and the circumstances were ideal

for work.

The way the teacher dealt with emerging problems was effective too. She was able to

make the students speak English even if the students were unwilling, or too tired to do so. She

was able to keep the group productive with successfully employed motivational strategies and

with the help of well-established group dynamics.

With more attention towards the rewards the teacher promised, she could have boosted

student motivation more successfully. Also, although the teacher could make anybody speak

during the lesson, due to the frontal nature of her teaching many students did not get enough

chance to produce English. With more varied tasks and groupwork activities the amount of

student speaking time would have multiplied, but it was not sure that the students would have

remained focused on task without the teacher’s constant supervision.

References:

Dörnyei, Z. (2001): Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Pearson Education

Limited.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986): Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford

University Press.