This reflection is a continuation of Classroom Reflection #6. In this reflection I will discuss the second hour of the same class.
The teacher presented materials to spark discussion among the students. He showed a video arguing that modern art is not real art, followed by some other examples of modern art. He asked the students to form an opinion which they would express in their discussions. I saw this exercise as a method of promoting critical thinking skills and using effective language to show that thinking. I think developing the ability to verbally express critical thinking in English will make these students sound more articulate in English and help them be successful. To encourage use of varied language, the teacher assigned a “devil’s advocate” in each discussion group. In doing so, the teacher was attempting to force the students to use language not only to agree in discussions, but also to disagree.
Assessment in this part of the class, I assume, was informal. The teacher went into each virtual discussion room to assess student participation. He checked if students had their cameras on and if everyone was engaged in discussion. I believe the majority of the discussion groups did not use cameras and the teacher expressed disappointment that the students were neglecting this key aspect of participation. One student from each discussion group was assigned the role of presenter, and they were to summarize their group’s discussion for the class. The teacher could assess clarity of speech and communication as well as preparedness. The teacher indicated that preparedness was an element lacking in the presentations and asked that the students be more prepared in the future.
Once again I think the nature of the virtual classroom got in the way of learning, particularly in the group discussions. In the group I observed, the students did not turn on their cameras which allowed one of them to hide. One person, who was assigned the role of presenter, did not engage in the discussion at all. The other two group members were having a good discussion, but I think they would have understood each other better if they could see each other. The student assigned the presenter role ended up attempting to summarize a discussion they were not involved in, and the report was inaccurate. It was hard for the teacher to know what was going on without being able to see the students and know what is happening in the study rooms. In an in-person class, the groups would just be spread out around the room and the teacher could see them all the whole time they were discussing. He would know who was participating and who he needed to encourage to be more involved.
I will soon be teaching online classes and I need to remember the challenges with using the virtual space that I have observed. I will be teaching with a partner, and the two of us will only have around five students to teach together. I hope that the more even teacher-to-student ratio will allow us supervise the class in a way that is more similar to in-person classes. The numbers will allow us to have two discussion groups, each with one teacher supervising. I want to attempt this supervision strategy in my teaching in hopes of increasing student participation. I am hoping that having a teacher present will prompt the students who have been hiding to participate more. It may not work, but I think it is something worth trying.