Saturday, April 13, 2013

The problems of letting go.. Reflection 5(Harvinder)


b)

          The TP has taught me a very important lesson on the term “Time constraint”. While teaching Merchant of Venice to many of my Lower Secondary students, I find myself in a constant race with my arch nemesis, the minute hand on the classroom clock. This minute hand is out to get me. It disallows me from giving students some amount of experiential learning of the text. It also disallows me from pressing students into forming their own opinions of the characters. It’s partner in crime is someone I would like to label as “Sir Syllabus of Litville,” commonly known as the Literature Syllabus. As this text is being taught to a Lower Secondary class, I am tasked with the following:

1.  Completing the text in the stipulated timeframe to a class of students who are pretty clueless of this Alien Early Modern English.
2. Allowing the students to know enough to effectively seat for their Examinations.

            As such, as I teach the students about this piece of Drama, something has got to give. My arch nemesis and his partner in crime have just too much power over me. The “best decision” would be to frame my lessons to lead up to the main things they will be tested on in their examinations. This would mean letting go of some crucial lessons and possible readings of the Merchant of Venice. With minute hand constantly robbing them of time, (seriously, I have never come across any other villain who works non-stop like this) the teacher cannot possible cover all the facets of the text. As such, I have to cut down on teaching students some Dramatic devices employed by William Shakespeare. This is something that makes me feel extremely guilty. I have sleepless nights thinking about how students will never know the significance of the use of contrasting images/ juxtapositions in Gratiano’s conversation with Antonio. I have thee sleepless nights not because my bed is uncomfortable, neither is it because the students are not able to learn/process this at this current juncture. The sleepless nights come from the fact that I am choosing what is important for them to learn. I am not providing them with the rich vocabulary of devices that they can use to identify the beauty of the writer’s craft. 

            Depending on the teacher, students may never know how Shakespeare wrote with such care in beautifying a play by painting vivid pictures with words. Students may also never know that there are usages of Puns, Foreshadowing and Dramatic tension in one Scene alone. It really depends on the teacher.  We choose what is important for the students and that in turn guides our lesson. The question is, “Who are we to guide them?”; Are we the absolute and final possible reading of the text? In sooth, no. Then, who are we to provide them with what is important in a piece of Drama and what is not? Have we conducted a worldwide poll on “Why Foreshadowing is more prominent/important a technique vs Imagery(Metaphors)?” We have not. However, we cannot keep concentrating and explaining along the way why this is a metaphor or that is an instance of foreshadowing. The repetition may help the students better identify such techniques but we do not have time to pick out all that there is to allow them this. We pick and choose what is important and hope it sinks in. The smarter students will get it after a few examples. The slower students may not and will struggle to identify the techniques still. Do we ensure all students can successfully identify the constant use of a dramatic literary technique or do we expose them to as much of it as possible? Quality vs Quantity.

            As such, the problem that I am facing and which will always be there till the end of time is ensuring the students can indeed learn all that they need to in their one year of studying Literature, without losing out on too much. Teaching Shakespeare in Lower Secondary, for example can take up to 3 terms or even a whole year. We still have to cover things like Poetry and Prose/short stories. Students need to be exposed to a variety of prose and poetry. It is up to us to effectively frame up a year’s work to ensure students get the most of their experience in Literature. Unfortunately, something we have to live with is condensing some areas of study and leaving out some less crucial bits (even though it may give us sleepless nights).The  phrase “less crucial bits,” after all, is always subject to debate. At the end of the day, to sum up in a terrible metaphorical example, Batman may think Robin due to his acrobatic fighting skills is important but Robin may not be so crucial when the only enemy in question is the Joker, who frankly is all brains. That is the sad price to pay in teaching Lower Secondary students Shakespeare.

Friday, April 12, 2013

Shih Wen's Reflection 5


b)
Practicum has taught me the practical skills for teaching Literature. The school offers only lower secondary Literature, and I was assigned to teach Secondary 1 (Academic) students. For my stint in the school, I am required to teach 7 compulsory poems namely

·         “One Art” by Elizabeth Bishop

·         “Funeral Blues” by WH Auden

·         “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” by Robert Frost

·         “The Daffodils” by William Wordsworth

·         “The Tiger” by William Blake

·         “Neighbours” by Alfian Sa’at

·         “Evening Song” by Leong Liew Geok

Students do not have mid-year examination for Literature and they are assessed based on two Literature Quizzes and one Literature Project (all in term 2). It sounded promising at first…

6 weeks into practicum (5 weeks of actual teaching), I have taught the 1A students similes, metaphors, personification, “The Daffodils”, “One Art” and have given them a quiz on an unseen poem (“Funeral Blues”) which tests them for their understanding of the literary devices taught. I have 3 periods with them a week, each 30 minutes. They have also missed two periods in week 2 due to a leadership camp. With so little time and so many areas to be covered, I cannot help but to wonder if students really enjoy Literature in the midst of all this hectic business, being bent over backwards with homework, quizzes, project etc. What I have yet to cover (and must be covered by week 8 of my practicum), are 4 poems, a quiz, and a project presentation. My Co-operating Teacher gave us full autonomy in coming up with the Literature Project. As such, a fellow trainee and I designed a Project for students where they would have to imagine themselves as Literature teachers applying for a position at a school. Then there was a painful, unison outcry of “eeeeewwwww...” and “noooooo…”. I was perplexed. Why the outright negative response? It did not take me long to realise what the school, or I for that matter, killed the joy of learning Literature in the first place. It was clear. The students hate Literature, and they cringe at the thought of becoming a Literature teacher. How do we expect students to appreciate poetry when they are drilled non-stop with technicalities under the pressure of a tight curriculum? The irony of it all is that while examinations are taken out of the assessment process, students are piled with more “summative assessments” which seems rather like “mini formative assessments”.

It is not hard to foresee what challenges lie ahead as I develop as a Literature teacher in my school. Without support from the school in terms of a better Literature curriculum and programme, teachers become robots fulfilling one task after another in a systematic manner, stunting professional development. There is no room for AFL (Assessment For Learning) or SDL (Self-Directed Learning) to take place since both require time, a luxury which Literature teachers in this school do not have. Last week, I raised the issue of not being able to complete the compulsory poems which should be taught to the 1A students by term 2 week 6 and requested to drop two of them so that I could concentrate on the remaining two. I was turned down by my mentor as she proclaimed that MOE requires students to complete all 7 of the poems. That raises the issue of the jarring gap between policy makers and schools. While I am not particularly aware what is exactly required of the students (i.e. whether they have to complete 7 poems by second half of term 2) from the ministry, I am very sure somewhere that along the way, information has been miscommunicated. As educators, we talk about differentiated learning all the time. While it is evident in the choice of different streams available to students today (i.e. normal, express, special etc), it is non-existent across students in the same stream from different schools. In other words, Normal Academic stream students from one school might have the same academic competency as Express stream students from another school and vice versa. Do we then teach them the same, and cover the same grounds for both groups of students? That brings us back to the state of Literature in my school. In my school, I am always told that “Our Express stream students are equivalent to Normal stream students from other schools.” It is not hard to make the connection of what our Normal Academic students are equivalent to in other schools. In the end, I was asked to cover the rest of the poems in a superficial manner, and that I can take just 2 periods (60 minutes) to cover each poem. I made the calculation. I am still short of 1 hour for the last poem, but what can a trainee/beginning teacher do to but to oblige?

I am not sure what kind of change I can make when I eventually become a beginning teacher. In the case of my current school, I would probably learn to adopt and adapt what is thrust into my arms t make Literature less painful for my students.

Alfie's Refletion 5

Focus on a specific assessment task in your school. Describe the assessment and discuss its effectiveness. 

Last term, one of the assessment put in place was the creation of a story expressed through comics and a character profile write-up. Students formed groups of four or five and worked on their project for two lessons (2 weeks). My ct came up with a specific rubric to mark the comics and character profile. The assessment made up 50% of their CA. 

Telling a story through comics
This part of the assessment tested students' understanding of plot; Introduction, rising action, climax, falling action, resolution. Students had to create an original story and tell that story through comics (pixton.com). I think the students found the comic-making process an interesting one. Most of the comics did actually adhere to the basic elements of plot, showing  a sense of understanding of the previous lesson. This assessment also allowed students to express their creativity and which was evident in most of the stories. Interestingly, most stories also conveyed values like punctuality or loyalty. Perhaps, a disadvantage of this assessment is that some students chose to only do their comics at the last lesson and they did not produce good stories. Strict monitoring of students' projects work is essential even though it can be cumbersome with six classes. 

Character profile
Students had to choose a character from a movie, storybook or TV drama. They had to do a characterization of the character (two characteristics with evidence) and explain why they like or dislike the character. They also had to create a character profile picture of the character in a situation that portrays who the character is. For example, a group who did a character profile of Thor portrayed Thor saving a group of people from Loki. This then coincided with their characterization of Thor that describes him to be a brave person. I thought that this was an effective form of assessment in testing students' understanding of characterization. Most of the students were able to describe the characters they have chosen and it familiarizes the notion of characterization as well. They do not see characterization as a distant, useless understanding. Perhaps, a downside of this activity was that students were not able to competently give good evidence and that some of the descriptions of the characters were rather surface. 

Overall, I found this assessment interesting and effective for the secondary one level. Most students could apply their understanding of plot and characters in their comic and character profile.  It was also very visual and the students at my school learn better through visual aids. It was heartening to read comics that showed not only creativity but heart. 

About 4 more weeks! We're almost there!! :D




Yati's Reflection 5

b.

Hi, I hope everyone is coping with practicum well. Anyway, I would like to share with you my experience from teaching practicum. I have learnt a lot from my TP and they included insights about my identity as a teacher and also some lesson learnt about classroom management and lesson delivery.

I would begin by telling you that this TP has helped me "find" who I am as a teacher. Last TP I was the overly-strict and serious teacher and whenever I tried to slip into who I am naturally, I find it difficult and students thought I was trying to hard. NIE has always taught us to be always strict when you start and with me that tip has never worked out. So what I do is to start nice and firm. I greet students say "hi how are you" all friendly but when I talk to them about discipline and about schoolwork, I get extremely serious. I frown real hard and show them I really mean business and then go back to being "normal" whenever I start teaching again. Whenever students go against any of the rules or do not meet my expectations, I will turn into this monster and students don't like it and usually behave better because they don't like that side of me.

Of course, I am still developing as a teacher and my identity as a teacher is something I still struggle with from time-to-time. How do I teach Lit the way I want but also maintain the balance between being fun and goofy and being serious and firm. As a result, I have had CTs telling me that I can be inconsistent because when I am nice "I am too nice" and when I am strict "I am too strict". So striking the right balance is still something of a struggle but I have learnt a lot about my capabilities and identity as a teacher and in the meantime I will continue to work on this.

Another thing I would like to share is my experience of the actual lesson delivery. I enjoy teaching Literature because I can run with different activities and my CT is very supportive and encouraging when I do this.  For the lower secondary school lessons I find that the challenge is getting students to feel engaged with the text.  So my lessons will always be dramatic and loud and I have learnt that being as loud dramatic and fun is the only way I can gain students' attention especially after 1pm classes (my school ends at 3-3.30pm on Mons to Thurs). However, I have a harder time with my upper sec Lit class.

It is a class of 19 students and they are rather shy and many of the activities that I plan do not go according to plan as students are too shy and reserved to participate. Also, I found that I have to be extremely clear and slow and as my CT advised "treat them like idiots" during my explanation of jargon like couplet and sestet which to me, were very simple to understand. My lesson delivery for the upper sec is not as clear as I assume that students know things and that things are easy enough for them. As such, a challenge is to be able to teach these students in a clear but at the same time make the lesson fun and not teacher centred.

So those are my thoughts! Thanks for reading til the end and I wish you good luck in your practicum guys! A few more to go!

Creative/innovative practice in my school - Mariam

Hello all! Not sure if all schools have this, but my previous 2 schools didn't so I'm guessing this is unique to my school. In JYSS, all departments have Lesson Study groups which experiment and try out new interesting lessons on a test class, and if it works, will roll out the lesson to the cohort. I got stuck with an English Lesson Study group which is doing an experimental lesson using iPads to teach complaint letter. The Lit Lesson Study group is doing an experimental lesson tweaking envisionment for Unseen poems and I got to pitch the poems since I'm not there physically and they chose Mid Term Break - remember the one in which the persona's little brother died? I also learnt a lot about material choice from the pitch because my first pick before Mid Term Break was Stop All The Clocks, which would be so fun for envisionment right? With all its dramatic images? But apparently the homosexual slant wouldn't fly so whatever.

Have a great week ahead! Here's hoping we have more chances to teach what we actually like (though the probability is slim and our prospects of that happening bleak)

Michelle's Reflection - Formal Assessment: CA1 Test

The first Literature test I had to administer was a test based on Act 1 of The Merchant of Venice for the Secondary 2 classes.The test had 4 questions. Question 1 was a characterisation question on Bassanio and students were required to write about two of his character traits using the PEEL format. Question 2 was another characterisation question, this time on Shylock, and students had to write about one of his character trait, also using the PEEL format. Question 3 and 4 basically asked students to describe aspects of the plot.

Overall, I felt that the test was meaningless and ineffective. Firstly, prior to the test, students were already given a worksheet with two to three character traits of each main character in the PEEL format. Thus, students who made sure to study that worksheet and memorise the character traits in the PEEL format generally did well for the test. All they had to do was to regurgitate what they had memorised. When I talked to students personally after returning the test, some of them admitted to me that they had no idea what they were writing and that they just wrote that Bassanio is an opportunist for example, because that was what the teacher taught them. So what I felt was that students with better marks were not necessarily better Literature students who knew how to interpret a text or explain a point coherently. The test was therefore not a good indicator of their ability as a student of Literature.

Secondly, the PEEL format which they were forced to answer in did more harm than good to some students.  Instead of writing a paragraph that flowed cohesively and coherently, some students wrote their answers in such a manner:

P: (one liner)
E: (quote that they memorised)
E: (one liner)
L: (repetition of P)

Many students saw it as lines to fill up and they felt that as long as they had one line for P, E, E, and L, they will get a mark for each line. The argument thus did not always flow consistently. The second E which is supposed to be the explanation sometimes was just a repetition and rephrasing of the quote they wrote in the first E, or sometimes just a different example from the text that supports the point but not related to the quote they provided.

Thirdly, I also felt that students were confused because the 'easier' questions that just required them to describe the plot were in the later section of the test. The way the questions in the test was structured was such that the inferential questions came before the literal questions. This did not make much sense to me, especially since I tried to use Hillocks' hierarchy of skills  in the design of the formal assessment for my group project for this ACR course. Evidently, my students also could not understand this and decided that it must be some sort of 'trick' so many students unnecessarily explained more than was required of the question.

In conclusion, the effectiveness of the test was affected by how the students were taught over the past few months and also, how the questions were structured and designed. As the Literature lessons seemed to focus on content more than skills, many students could only reproduce what they have been taught and what they have memorised, therefore defeating the purpose of the test which was supposed to evaluate how well they could explain a point.

Elizabeth Final Reflection


Focus on a specific assessment task in your school. Describe the assessment and discuss its effectiveness

In the Sec 2 Lit classes in PLMGS, an alternative mode of assessment required the students to engage in  project where they creatively engaged with the text of “Merchant of Venice”. There were several options the students could choose from. In one option, students could create a family tree, linking the characters together in an organized manner and giving  detailed character descriptions. In another option, students were given four scenarios from the text (one example: Shylock’s daughter running away with his money). Students would then design and create a newspaper with these four scenarios.

These projects allowed students to explore the text in greater depth, based on prior knowledge as well as in their own discoveries. The creation of the family tree, for instance, employed characterization skills, which had been partly covered in class, but also required them to read the text in further detail. By putting these information down into a family tree, it helps students to organize their thoughts and what they know about the characters in  a more systematic manner. The newspaper reports employed students creative juices and also developed  their writing styles. I was impressed that some students were able to write in the style very similar to that of a journalist, making the newspaper article very convincing and believable. While there were some groups of students who gave substandard work, most groups put in a lot of effort in drawing out information from the text and presenting it in their own creative methods.

The projects were graded according to the rubric that consisted of 5 categories: (i) Content (ii) Creativity and style (iii) Analysis of characters/events                     (iv) Presentation of project (v) Teamwork. While this rubric seems comprehensive and “covers all grounds”, I realized that it was not so when I was tasked to grade the projects.

Firstly, the “teamwork” component was  rather unclear, as it could not be seen overtly if everyone in the group had done their share of work. For this component, I would improve it by getting students to do a “Peer Evaluation” form, so that, as a teacher, I would be made more aware, should there be free loaders in a group.

Secondly, the different projects demanded different skills, the universal rubric was not as applicable to some projects. For instance, for the group doing the family tree (which only required them to link characters and do a character description), “content” was not part of their assignment. As such, when it came to the grading of the “content” section, it became rather ambiguous. The rubric, hence, was not universal, and could not be used accurately for each project that had been given to students as options they could choose from. For such a task, where there are options of the kinds of projects that students want to embark on, perhaps, a rubric for each option of project would give the project a more accurate assessment.