 |
| (PgDHE candidates with tutor KC Jose; me behind sir Jose grinning) |
Reflection on Micro-teaching done at Samtse College of Education on 7 January 2014
Today, I have done Micro-teaching (in the morning
session: 9:00-10:00 am) on “Essay and Report: Differences and similarities”
as a part of EDU505 [Introduction
to University Learning and Teaching] module assessment. The lesson plan was
prepared for 6 minutes and my teaching was observed by Mrs. Ugyen Pem
(facilitator) and Mr. Kelzang Dorji (Lecturer of Sherubtse College).
I began by greeting my students (who are actually all participants) and introducing the
lesson topic. I could read from the faces that the students and observers were
curious on my teaching. It encouraged me even more. To begin the actual
teaching I asked students what they understood by the words ‘report’ and ‘essay’
where my students provided me with their views and opinions. And I just needed
to add and explain more on their points.
After that, I talked on the features of both essay
and report; having done that, I tried to once again get their understanding of
the concepts by asking them to bring out some similarities and differences
between the two (essay and report). The students were very active and were all
ready to participate. That was interesting. Also, I feel that my teaching was
convincing; was very audible and could provide clear instructions to my students.
But, despite my preparation, the teaching did not go as planned. I had to stop incomplete as the time duration allotted was insufficient. I am now aware that my conclusion was not good. I received feedback and suggestions on my micro-teaching based on the observation made by my two observers. As a way forward commitment, I am determined to change my teaching methods by incorporating at least three strategies: PowerPoint presentation; provide students with handouts for class activity; and question answer session.
But, despite my preparation, the teaching did not go as planned. I had to stop incomplete as the time duration allotted was insufficient. I am now aware that my conclusion was not good. I received feedback and suggestions on my micro-teaching based on the observation made by my two observers. As a way forward commitment, I am determined to change my teaching methods by incorporating at least three strategies: PowerPoint presentation; provide students with handouts for class activity; and question answer session.
My Reflection on Second Presentation
On 9 Jan I did second micro-teaching on “Approaching& Understanding Written Assignment” under the guidance of the module (EDU505) facilitator. My teaching was observed by Mrs. Ugyen Pem (facilitator) and Drungsto Sherab Dorji (Lecturer of National Institute of Traditional Medicine”.
I greeted my class and introduced the lesson plan
through PowerPoint slide. After that I talked a little about the importance of
understanding the assignment questions and answering rightly as per the
requirements and demands of the question. I then asked if any of them had any
technique to diagnose questions. My students gave their views but BUG method
seemed unfamiliar. However, I demonstrated how to use that technique with example
question.
To assess students’ understanding, I distributed a
sample question and asked students to identify BUG (Box, Underline, &
Glance Back) words. Students answered right. This only indicated that my
students have understood the concept well.
Comparatively, my second demo-teaching was good. I
incorporated three strategies: power point presentation, distribution of
handouts for class work and question-answer session. This was based on the
recommendation made by my observers during previous presentation
(micro-teaching). I also managed my allotted time quite well. I took a little
more than six minutes to conclude my lesson.
Written by Karma Yezer for EDU505 module facilitator Mrs. Ugyen Pem
