Jimmy Hunt 30052409

Assessment Task 1

Self-evaluation

Introduction

Microteaching helps pre-service teachers improve their teaching skills (Marios, 2016). The benefits

of microteaching, or peer teaching, are plentiful. Pre-service teachers’ practice of microteaching can

help them improve the critical thinking of their future students (Arsal, 2015). It increases confidence

and self-awareness in pre-service teachers' ability and expertise (Al Darwish, 2016). And in a broader

sense, microteaching enables pre-service teachers to reflect on the greater context of professional

teaching (Tan, 2010). Therefore the opportunity to conduct a microteaching session was greatly

beneficial for me.

Feedback

I received very positive feedback from both of the students who reviewed my lesson (see Appendix

A for Lesson Plan A). This provided me with positive reinforcement about many of the things I’d

decided upon during the planning and preparation stages of the lesson.

In the Introduction section of Feedback Form 1 (see Appendix B for Feedback Form 1), the student

placed ticks next to ‘Established appropriate mood and climate,’ ‘Motivated the learners to learn,’

‘Oriented the learners to new content’ and ‘Stated objectives clearly.’ They also wrote ‘Started with

question + interaction,’ ‘Learning intentions stated,’ ‘Vark model was new content,’ and ‘Asked if

students knew how to do what was being instructed.’ Each of these points was something I

consciously addressed while planning and preparing for the lesson.

I deliberately started the introduction to my lesson with an easy question for all students, quickly

followed by more difficult questions to be asked in a cold-calling manner to individual students. The

first question was a simple yes or no question in which I asked if all students are the same, and asked

students to raise their hands if they believed all students were the same. I didn’t expect anybody to

raise their hands, since our studies up to that point had clearly shown that students are not all the

same. I then asked students to raise their hand if they believed students were not the same. As

expected, all students raised their hands. I chose a non-verbal method of response and directed the

question to the entire class with the belief that students would feel more comfortable responding

than if I’d asked an individual student to respond verbally. All students raised their hands which

showed they were engaged, and from this point I singled out students to ask them for more

information. By asking open-ended questions early to students who hadn’t volunteered answers, I

demonstrated to the class that anybody could be called upon at any time, and set a mood of

preparedness.

Neil Fleming’s VARK Model is very practical so I was able to implement it while teaching it – for each

learning style exlpained I provided symbols for visual learners, natural speaking for aural learners,

text for read/write learners, and demonstrations for kinaesthetic learners. My intentions for this

were twofold; I wanted to make the content interesting and appealing to all students, while also

providing examples of the model being used in practice. This appeared to be worthwhile, as the

student who completed Feedback Form 2 (see Appendix C for Feedback Form 2) stated ‘Visual

displays + clipart made it easier to understand and pay attention.’

Feedback about my group activity showed it was also received positively. Feedback Form 2 said it

was a ‘simple activity but also challenging,’ and that they ‘liked how activity was simple but reflected

theory so much more.’ It is pleasing to know that my group activity was both simple and challenging

because that indicates a good activity. In instructing the group activity I verbally explained the

activity in a broad sense, with instructions in text in the slideshow (see Appendix D for PowerPoint

slideshow), catering to aural and read/write learners. I then explained to each group in more detail

what their task was, while giving them their materials and a handout (see Appendix E for Handouts)

with more information and examples of their targeted learning style. This was acknowledged in

Feedback Form 1 which said, ‘Gave guide for activity in case forgot material.’

In the conclusion of my lesson I intended to summarise the major points of the lesson and evaluate

whether the learning intentions had been achieved, in a manner that encouraged participation and

discussion. To do this I rephrased the learning intentions as questions and asked them to the class.

Based on the feedback, this approach yielded success. Feedback Form 1 mentioned that it was a

‘great closure – lots of conversation, questions,’ and Feedback Form 2 acknowledged that the

conclusion ‘got us to recap + make sure we understood.’

I also received good feedback about my delivery of the lesson. Feedback Form 1 said I ‘spoke to each

group positively during group work’ and ‘stimulated conversation with group,’ while Feedback Form

2 said I ‘created a motivated mood’ and that I was ‘very confident’ and a ‘very clear speaker.’ I credit

these points to my planning and preparation.

I received a piece of constructive criticism on Feedback Form 2 which said I ‘could make more

comments + ask questions when coming around to groups (but understand timing).’ I visited each

group once to clarify their understanding of the task and what they intended to do or had already

begun. I would have liked to delve further into these discussions, but as the feedback stated, there

was not enough time in the 10 minute lesson.

Feedback Form 1 provided a vague note which could be interpreted as either negative or positive;

‘maybe a little interesting, link to modern life examples.’ This may be a positive statement

acknowledging that I had mentioned modern things such as podcasts, videos, Microsoft Word and

simulations in my examples of methods for each learning style. However it may also have been a

negative comment suggesting that I should put more emphasis on these aspects, demonstrate their

use, or acknowledge more modern resources in my lesson.

Self-reflection

I included seven self-reflection questions in my lesson plan and feel I can comfortably respond

positively to the five simple questions. My questions during the introduction of the lesson revealed

that students had a brief understanding of learning styles, and my broad open-ended questions

effectively led to a discussion about learning styles. I believe the students were engaged because

there was substantial discussion within the groups during the activity, and a chorus of responses to

my concluding questions. The lesson did run in a fairly timely fashion, at 10 minutes and 52 seconds.

I felt I facilitated the lesson well, and the feedback from my peers supported this.

My lesson plan also included the broader question, ‘what worked well?’ I believe all components of

the lesson worked well, but there are some that stand out to me which I would like to emphasise;

encouraging student interaction early, the upbeat delivery of the lesson, catering to four learning

styles, and providing examples.

I began my lesson with student interaction, but gave them an opportunity to do it comfortably

before gradually placing more demand on them. This ensured they were ‘warmed up’ and ready to

participate in a meaningful way when required. I believe this worked well because everybody raised

their hand at the beginning of the lesson, and the students that I then ‘cold called’ gave good

responses.

I believe a teacher’s attitude and enthusiasm are highly influential for their students, so I made a

point of displaying energy through my speech and body language. I feel that this encouraged

participation as well as excitement about the subject, and the discussion at the end of the lesson

reinforced this.

Teaching students’ preferred learning styles allows more active learning amongst students (Fleming

& Baume, 2007) so I ensured the main points of the lesson were taught in each of the four styles

identified in the lesson’s own subject, the VARK model. This clearly worked because each group in

the group activity gave a good example, and many students provided rapid responses during the

conclusion of the lesson without being individually called upon.

In describing the four learning styles I detailed some preferred materials for each style, and then

gave an example. I used the same subject for each example but changed the format for each

learning style. The students appeared to respond well to this and gave appropriate examples during

the group activity.

As for what didn’t work well, my only disappointment was having difficulty maintaining a balance in

moving around the classroom and retreating to the corner of the room to change slides. I like to

create a comfortable, intimate setting by standing in front of the classroom unobstructed, moving

around the room to create a physical presence. However, the classroom’s layout forced me to stay

close to the computer and walk behind there every time I had to turn to the next slide in the

PowerPoint presentation.

Justification of changes

Based on my positive feedback and my self-evaluation, I believe the lesson was a success and

although I would be confident in teaching it again exactly the same way, there are three small

changes I added to the revised lesson plan (see Appendix F for Lesson Plan B).

I like to move around the classroom to retain the students’ focus and readiness to respond to

questions. However this was not possible during the introduction or conclusion of the lesson as I

frequently needed to approach the computer in the corner of the classroom to change slides in the

PowerPoint presentation. Therefore in my revised lesson plan I added another resource; a remote

control. A wireless computer mouse is able to function in this way so I will look to use one of these in

the future when presenting slideshows.

Although it was not an assessable aspect of the peer teach and did not change the effectiveness of

the lesson, the feedback forms mentioned enquiring about students’ prior knowledge of the subject.

I feel I could have spent more time on this point. I led a short discussion about learning styles at the

beginning of my lesson, but only touched on students’ awareness of their existence, and I did not

enquire about any specific knowledge the students possessed. So in my revised lesson plan I would

simply add another question after the discussion reached learning styles, asking what learning styles

the students are familiar with.

The last revision I made to the lesson plan was the addition of a countdown timer on the PowerPoint

slide displayed during the group activity. I believe I managed this time fairly well; I had rehearsed the

lesson and was confident in my ability to manage time without checking a clock, and I advised the

class when there was one minute left, and then when there were 30 seconds left. The read/write

group was still writing instructions for their activity when I asked the groups to stop working. I

waited a few seconds because their activity required more work than the other groups, before

asking them to stop before completing their task because they would be able to demonstrate that

they were competent in their ability to complete the task successfully despite not finishing it. If I had

included a countdown timer on the slideshow I believe this would have instilled a sense of urgency

and a better awareness of not just the fact that time was limited, but also how much time was

remaining.

Appendices

Appendix AJimmy Hunt 30052409 – Practice Lesson Plan A

Topic: Neil Fleming’s VARK model

Learning Intention: Understand the four elements of the VARK model Identify teaching activities to cater to each of the four learning preferences

Resources: Powerpoint presentation Handout for each group describing each learning style Four sets of paper and markers

Lesson OutlineIntroduction:

Ask the class, “Are all students the same? Raise your hand if you think yes, all students are the same. Now raise your hand if you think no, not all students are the same.” in order to initiate student participation and thinking about differences between students. Ask open-ended questions leading to learning styles (prompting if necessary).

Begin PowerPoint slideshow with Learning Intentions, then descriptions of the four learning styles in the VARK model (catering to visual, aural and read/write learners), and examples of teaching activities for each (catering to all four types of learners).

Slide: Learning Intentions

Understand the four learning styles of the VARK model Identify teaching activities which cater to each of the four learning preferences

Slide: Introduction of Neil Fleming

Neil D. Fleming (born 1939) is a teacher from New Zealand. Taught in universities, teacher education centers and high schools. Nine years as a school inspector in New Zealand, observing over 9000 classes.

Slide: The VARK Model

Fleming developed the VARK model of learning modalities, and a questionnaire to determine your preference/s

The acronym VARK stands for Visual, Aural, Read/write, and Kinesthetic – sensory modalities that are used for learning information

Slide: Visual (V)

This preference includes maps, diagrams, charts, graphs, flow charts, arrows, and other devices that represent what could be presented in words.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for visual learners

(Diagrams indicate how to wind your arm back, rotate it, and release the ball, in order.)

Slide: Aural/Auditory (A)

This mode describes a preference for information that is heard or spoken. Aural/auditory learners learn best from lectures, group discussion, radio, speaking and email, because it’s often chat-style with non-formal language.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for aural/auditory learners

Describe, discuss and elaborate on the following points: Grasp ball with hand Wind arm back, keeping ball around head height Rotate arm forwards, from shoulder to elbow to wrist Release ball when arm is fully extended in front

Slide: Read/write (R)

This preference is for information displayed as words. It emphasizes text-based input and output – reading and writing in all its forms but especially manuals, reports, essays and assignments.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for read/write learners

Grasp the tennis ball with your hand. Wind your arm back, keeping the ball around head height. Rotate your arm forwards, beginning from your shoulder, followed by your elbow, then finally to your wrist. Release the ball from your hand when your arm is fully extended in front of you.

Slide: Kinesthetic (K)

This modality includes demonstrations, simulations, videos and movies of “real” things, as well as case studies, practice and applications.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for kinesthetic learners

Take this ballDo this(Teacher demonstrates how to throw a ball)

Slide: Group work

Develop an instructional activity to teach students how to draw a smiley face, for a modality designated by the teacher.

Slide: Conclusion

What are the four modalities, or learning styles, in the VARK model?

What activities are appropriate for each modality?

Teaching strategy/Learning Activity:

Students will: Watch a PowerPoint presentation on Fleming’s VARK model, answering questions to confirm

comprehension In groups, develop teaching activities for their designated modality Present their teaching activities to the class Engage in a discussion about using the VARK model

Teacher will: Introduce Fleming and his VARK model via a PowerPoint presentation, asking questions to

gauge understanding and encourage participation Explain that students will develop teaching activities to cater to each modality Designate four groups and assign modalities Rove the classroom, guiding and assisting as necessary Ask non-presenting students to offer feedback Lead a closing discussion on use of the VARK model

Concluding strategy:

Encourage meaningful discussion to invoke a deeper understanding of the lesson objectives. Bring the class back together and discuss outcomes from the group task. Ask questions relating to the lesson’s learning outcomes;

o What are the four modalities, or learning styles, in the VARK model?o What activities are appropriate for each modality?

Assessment:

Development of appropriate teaching activity in group work task Offer feedback to other groups which demonstrates understanding of the VARK model Participation in the PowerPoint presentation and group activity

Any special considerations or contingency plans: No.

Self-reflection (anticipated self-questioning)

Were students already knowledgeable about learning styles? Were broad open-ended questions about student differences adequate to lead to learning

styles? What worked well? What didn’t work well? Were the students engaged? Did the lesson run in a timely fashion? Did I facilitate the lesson well?

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E

Appendix FJimmy Hunt 30052409 – Practice Lesson Plan B

Topic: Neil Fleming’s VARK model

Learning Intention: Understand the four elements of the VARK model Identify teaching activities to cater to each of the four learning preferences

Resources: Powerpoint presentation Handout for each group describing each learning style Four sets of paper and markers Remote ‘clicker’ to move to next PowerPoint slide

Lesson OutlineIntroduction:

Ask the class, “Are all students the same? Raise your hand if you think yes, all students are the same. Now raise your hand if you think no, not all students are the same.” in order to initiate student participation and thinking about differences between students. Ask open-ended questions leading to learning styles (prompting if necessary). Ask if students can name any learning styles.

Begin PowerPoint slideshow with Learning Intentions, then descriptions of the four learning styles in the VARK model (catering to visual, aural and read/write learners), and examples of teaching activities for each (catering to all four types of learners).

Slide: Learning Intentions

Understand the four learning styles of the VARK model Identify teaching activities which cater to each of the four learning preferences

Slide: Introduction of Neil Fleming

Neil D. Fleming (born 1939) is a teacher from New Zealand. Taught in universities, teacher education centers and high schools. Nine years as a school inspector in New Zealand, observing over 9000 classes.

Slide: The VARK Model

Fleming developed the VARK model of learning modalities, and a questionnaire to determine your preference/s

The acronym VARK stands for Visual, Aural, Read/write, and Kinesthetic – sensory modalities that are used for learning information

Slide: Visual (V)

This preference includes maps, diagrams, charts, graphs, flow charts, arrows, and other devices that represent what could be presented in words.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for visual learners

(Diagrams indicate how to wind your arm back, rotate it, and release the ball, in order.)

Slide: Aural/Auditory (A)

This mode describes a preference for information that is heard or spoken. Aural/auditory learners learn best from lectures, group discussion, radio, speaking and email, because it’s often chat-style with non-formal language.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for aural/auditory learners

Describe, discuss and elaborate on the following points: Grasp ball with hand Wind arm back, keeping ball around head height Rotate arm forwards, from shoulder to elbow to wrist Release ball when arm is fully extended in front

Slide: Read/write (R)

This preference is for information displayed as words. It emphasizes text-based input and output – reading and writing in all its forms but especially manuals, reports, essays and assignments.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for read/write learners

Grasp the tennis ball with your hand. Wind your arm back, keeping the ball around head height. Rotate your arm forwards, beginning from your shoulder, followed by your elbow, then finally to your wrist. Release the ball from your hand when your arm is fully extended in front of you.

Slide: Kinesthetic (K)

This modality includes demonstrations, simulations, videos and movies of “real” things, as well as case studies, practice and applications.

Slide: How to throw a tennis ball, for kinesthetic learners

Take this ballDo this(Teacher demonstrates how to throw a ball)

Slide: Group work

Develop an instructional activity to teach students how to draw a smiley face, for a modality designated by the teacher.

This slide contains a countdown timer set to three minutes.

Slide: Conclusion

What are the four modalities, or learning styles, in the VARK model? What activities are appropriate for each modality?

Teaching strategy/Learning Activity:

Students will: Watch a PowerPoint presentation on Fleming’s VARK model, answering questions to confirm

comprehension In groups, develop teaching activities for their designated modality Present their teaching activities to the class Engage in a discussion about using the VARK model

Teacher will: Introduce Fleming and his VARK model via a PowerPoint presentation, asking questions to

gauge understanding and encourage participation Explain that students will develop teaching activities to cater to each modality Designate four groups and assign modalities Rove the classroom, guiding and assisting as necessary Ask non-presenting students to offer feedback Lead a closing discussion on use of the VARK model

Concluding strategy:

Encourage meaningful discussion to invoke a deeper understanding of the lesson objectives. Bring the class back together and discuss outcomes from the group task. Ask questions relating to the lesson’s learning outcomes;

o What are the four modalities, or learning styles, in the VARK model?o What activities are appropriate for each modality?

Assessment:

Development of appropriate teaching activity in group work task Offer feedback to other groups which demonstrates understanding of the VARK model Participation in the PowerPoint presentation and group activity

Any special considerations or contingency plans: No.

Self-reflection (anticipated self-questioning)

Were students already knowledgeable about learning styles? Were broad open-ended questions about student differences adequate to lead to learning

styles? What worked well? What didn’t work well? Were the students engaged? Did the lesson run in a timely fashion? Did I facilitate the lesson well?

References

Al Darwish, S., Sadeqi, A. (2016). Microteaching Impact on Student Teacher's Performance: A Case

Study from Kuwait. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(8). Available from

http://www.eric.ed.gov.ezproxy.federation.edu.au/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?

accno=EJ1108123

Arsal, Z. (2015). The Effects of Microteaching on the Critical Thinking Dispositions of Pre-service

Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 40(3). Available from

http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2592&context=ajte

Fleming, N., & Baume, D. (2007). Learning styles again : VARKing up the right tree! HERDSA News,

29(1). Available from

http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.federation.edu.au/fullText;res=AEIPT;dn=159657

Marios, K. (2016). Teachers' Opinions Concerning Microteachings as a Training Technique: A Case

Study from ASPETE, Greece. Journal of Education and Training Studies 4(11). Available from

http://www.eric.ed.gov.ezproxy.federation.edu.au/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?

accno=EJ1117637

Tan, A., Wettasinghe, M., & Hasan, M. (2010). Reflection of teaching : a glimpse through the eyes of

pre-service science teachers. In C. Steel, M. Keppell, P. Gerbic & S. Housego (Ed.), Proceedings

of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 1-12).

Available from http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney10/procs/Aik_Ling_Tan-full.pdf