ICC Reflection: Gangnam Stylings
My Intentions-
I designed my micro-teaching on the basis of applying the “Five W’s and an H” concept to reading newspaper articles. I wanted my students to use the sentences “WHO is this article about… " “WHAT is this article about…” etc. to answer the questions about these articles on world popularity of a cultural icon. Gangnam Style articles, as they provided students with opportunity to compare a very BIG C in Korea (and now, around the world) with images and ideas they don’t usually connect with Korea. My goal was to get them thinking about WHY Gangnam Style appeals to everyone, and how something like this can be, and is being, used for constructive and peaceful purposes – not just as entertainment. There are a few stereotypes and ideas, such as a cathedral ONLY being used for religious purposes and the UN and Ban Ki-Moon being very SERIOUS cultural things, that allowed for great Big – and Small-C cultural discussion. Without explicitly teaching the SPEAKING framework, I want to be able to elicit students’ abilities to think about texts and interactions from a perspective that will help them understand the cultural context.
My main worry about this lesson was about the production exercise, but probably my concern should have been more about the balance between pre-teaching vocabulary and allowing the students to provide meaning consensus and negotiation in groups. We’ve spent so much time hammering vocabulary teaching and making sure students truly READ a text that, coupled with the fact that my article’s material is a BIT over slower students’ heads, the fact that I didn’t pre-teach any vocabulary slowed the presentation stage down a bit.
The material itself is engaging and is linked directly with the photos and videos shown in the preview stage. Students' schema were activated and they were prepared to read more about what they saw and recognized.
My Teaching: ICC and Methodology
I can see in some ways how my teacher talk has improved from the beginning of the STG course. Following my MIC’s and watching how I use tone and gesture to make my teacher talk clearer with less need for repetition is encouraging. The particular stage of the lesson was not as conducive to analyzing my CI techniques as, perhaps, the preview stage would have been, but I was pleased with some progress in eliciting answers and scaffolding students to correct meanings. For example, in drawing out the definition of “tight schedule”, we built on several students’ previous knowledge of “tight” to arrive at the correct definition.
One thing I’ve found is still a lack of encouraging SsàSsà or SsàSsà T in my questions and answers, whether it be in the preview stage or in organized comprehension checks and the isolation stage of practice. I also noticed that when students offered answers like “Busy schedule!” I neglected to check for complete sentences. Making sure to allow enough wait time for answers was still a problem, as was apparent in my agenda-oriented Teacher Talk here.
Another area I need to work on is whiteboard use. I found that my whiteboard both in the microteaching and regular school lessons, looks disorganized and can be distracting. Pre-planning whiteboard use to make the most of the space and aesthetic value would offer a clearer view of what is being elicited and taught. I tend to think of whiteboard as a non-MIC, but was able to see clearly from this video that my own efforts in this area need to be stepped-up. It's also a matter of time management: if I hadn't had to erase or crowd things in, I would have been able to spend MORE time on the presentation stage.
Accomplishment?
It’s difficult to isolate whether or not I accomplished my ICC objectives by looking only at the presentation stage, as the material but not the discussion of such appears here. I’d say that our arrived understanding of the text sets the stage for a clear acquisition of my objectives for both ICC and Methodology.
Link to a section of the video: 20121201_204304.mp4 »
