SA Observation: March 11, 2008

(Brenda Koch) Student Teacher evaluation – March 11, 2008

• Ran into a few difficulties when groups said they were not ready to present.
• You suggested that groups who were ready to go would get bonus points. This is a good strategy. Groups don’t feel punished.
• There was a delay in the start of the class. A few of the students seemed to be capitalizing on the delay, socializing and engaging in discussion that didn’t really improve their classroom experience. You needed to make an executive decision and select one group to start. You seemed to be a little “too democratic” in your approach.
• With group projects, students are going to take advantage of a group member’s absence. You need to have a backup plan as to how you were going to deal with absences. When you assign students group projects, let them know as well that they need to have a backup plan in the event that team members don’t appear; put the responsibility on them. Let them know that they will be presenting regardless of whether all their team members are present.
• We’re know about 10 minutes into the class and we’re still waiting for the first presentation. Was there work you could have had the rest of the class doing while they waited? Perhaps a short Q&A about what they learned from doing their projects? How has their perspective of BNW and dystopian societies changed?
• Technology can often pose problems. Sometimes it might be better to have students submit their work in advance and have the system ready to go so that time is not lost waiting for groups to get their presentations prepared.
• The video was effective. Students really were engaged. The video certainly did mimic the society the students were reading about in BNW. Was the video supposed to promote or denounce this “utopian society”? The presentation at the end video helped to clear up any of the questions created by the video.
• I liked the questions you were asking at the end of the video presentation. You could have encouraged a few questions from the students or simply asked the class for their interpretations.
• You are so much more relaxed in front of the class and this is obvious when you laugh and engage in casual banter with the students.
• I was glad to see you question one group about why they had not informed you about the foreseen absence of a group member.
• Your position at the back of the class enabled you to watch the presentation and oversee the entire class.
• I was glad to see a few students asking questions about the second presentation. You again asked a few questions yourself. I felt you could have encouraged a few more questions from the students.
• “Do you want to lead a discussion about your video?” I think you need to be a little less democratic.
• There were a few members of the class who were not paying attention during the initial questions of the discussion. However, within a few minutes, students were taking part in the question period. I felt you again could have encouraged more discussion. The question period was cut short fairly quickly.
• I loved the way you had students involved in the evaluation of the presentations and you were able to ensure relatively objective marking by offering bonus marks to students who were able to provide a mark that was identical to yours.
• Your timing was serendipitous. The last group finished their presentation with a few minutes left.
• I thought it was effective asking students what they felt about peer evaluation. It got them thinking about the process.

· The period seemed to lack a little closure. You could have asked a few questions about how people’s perspectives have changed or what they learned from the videos.