A reflection on my second microteaching

          My second micro-teaching lesson  was mainly a mixture of receptive skills (reading/listening) followed by a productive skill (speaking). The lesson includes a number of elements relevant to indirect instruction.

          The lesson started out with an attempt to relate to students prior knowledge by asking them about “Arial the Mermaid” as well as to introduce them to text relevant vocabulary. I made sure the theme I chose was culturally acceptable and familiar to the students. The story I selected had a moral at the end. My attempt was basically to make students induce the meaning from the story and later on, reflect on this moral based on life experience. Also, a good way would have been to approach the lesson from an experiential approach. That would be by introducing the moral at first and then making students relate to their own experiences based on this moral. Their reflection on previous experience would be a good set up introducing the reading task so that they relate more to it (Knutson, 2003). To assess students’ knowledge of basic vocabulary present in the reading text, I asked students for examples of animals that live in the sea and I got some examples such as fish, octopus, and sharks. It would have been better to ask for non-examples at this stage to confirm that students were familiar with sea animals as opposed to other kinds (Borich, 2007).

          In my prediction stage I followed a constructive approach. The prediction task materials (the cards with the drawings) were basically my ‘manipulative materials’ that I used to urge students to construct their own version of the story even if it was not the exact one. Students worked in groups and throughout the task, I monitored them and attempted to focus on their interests rather than impose anything on them. This task was a ‘compensatory’ effort on my side to boost my students’ ability to create a purpose before listening to or reading a text (Borich, 2007). A lot of students begin reading a text without any purpose and this makes the reading task dull, boring, or discrete. By pre-creating the story they were about to read and listen to, students were eager to know how close they were to the real story. Having worked in groups, the students integrated efforts in creating their stories. Cognitive psychologists believe that collaborative learning helps learners to process information by asking for assistance from each other (McCaffery, Jacobs & DaSilva, 2006). I assumed that was the case of my students during this task since they were deeply engaged in the creation of the story without even asking for my help. May and Rola kept re-strategizing for a better sequence of the story, which is why I wanted to give them more time.  A lot of second language speaking went on even though some used their native language. I tried to remind them of the importance of speaking in English, yet I did not stress them to do so. I believe at this stage time management could have been better. Students could have taken more time to rehearse their story over and over before telling it to me. Because I rushed them into it, they sounded skeptic when they were telling their stories.

          Rather than relying on paper to introduce the story, I decided to introduce the reading on screen. The incentive behind my choice is that learners nowadays are fascinated by the idea of reading on screen and this relates more them. However, I made sure I provided copies of the story later on for the comprehension question. Another reason why I introduced the story on screen was to read the story myself for the students. The integration of reading and listening at the same time is beneficial for learners. According to Froehlich (1988), the audio sound serves as a ‘verification’ of the utterance that the learners read. Another element of indirect instruction also existed in the post reading reflection. The task was oral. Students were required to discuss the moral of the story and relate it to their own experience. I made sure I followed the think, pair, share sequence since students took time to think about experiences, shared them with their partners and shared them with the class later on (Borich, 2007).

          All in all, I believe the lesson went well. I was calm and collected throughout the lesson. I tried to create an ambiance of the underwater world by using sound effects. I also made use of music in my class since its relaxes students and creates a friendly non-threatening atmosphere.