I will therefore need to explain my initial feelings towards the microteach and also consider the events in my life at the time in order to portray the assumptions I had about the experience, as they played an important role in the teaching style I adopted on the day. From the moment we were told of the microteach session I was against it. I initially felt that the session could in no way reflect my teaching style as I teach IT and we were told that we had to use our usual university teaching room, devoid of computers. We were also told that we would have a time limit of 15 minutes whereas I usually teach an hour and a half slot. When I sat down to plan the lesson I struggled to think of a subject or topic to teach to the group. I wanted to choose a succinct subject that the learners would show an interest in, and actually learn something. Initially I chose the topic of spreadsheets and then decided it was too heavy a subject for 15 minutes. I then settled on tying shoelaces, a simple subject that was practically based and could be adapted to be student centred. It was at this point that I began to recognise the value of the microteach. Although there were many differences between the 20 minutes session I was planning for the PCET group and my usual groups of students I had still adopted the same approach to planning, and I still worked naturally towards finding a student centred and practical approach to the topic.
On the day of my teaching practice I felt wary and not particularly comfortable with the thought of the microteach. Although I had prepared the lesson in my usual way I did not feel at ease with the idea of teaching the subject I had chosen. There were a number of situations in my life that were playing upon my mind and I felt I needed to be myself with the learners involved in the microteach. There was also the situation where some of the learners had forgotten to wear trainers (or shoes with laces) as they’d thought I would be taking that session in the following week. At this point (about 30 minutes before I was due to take the group) I realised I had two options, one was to continue with my original plan despite the adversities, and the other was to switch to a different topic that felt right. I chose the latter option because intuitively it felt like the right decision to make. I changed the lesson into a 15 minute yoga session from which I received both positive feedback and a more relaxed state of mind! After the session I was reflecting upon the experience and considered a remark by Schön "that a reflective teacher will almost certainly have to transcend the lesson plan" (Newman, 1999, p. 145). This seemed like a strange comment to make given that reflective individuals tend to stick to their original plans and then reflect with hindsight after the event. I would have argued that the flexibility to alter a lesson plan at the start of a lesson is more suited to activist person.
With these thoughts in mind I considered the outcome of the Learning Styles questionnaires we had used in the module Processes of Learning. My responses to this questionnaire placed me with a very strong preference for the Theorist stage, and moderate preference for all three of the other stages. According to the Honey and Mumford analysis of learning styles this would mean I am logical and questioning, I have good attention to detail and time management skills, and I am good at research. Theorists also tend to be detached and inflexible, and tend to find team interaction difficult. Whilst some of these statements are true of my learning style they do not seem to be so reflective of my teaching style. I found this strange, as I would have previously thought that teachers would teach others in their own preferred learning style. An activist is described by the FEDA pamphlet as a person who will act on initiative rather than consult others and who is willing to try something new that they have never tried before. I find this description more reflective of the flexibility elements of my teaching style. However, I feel that like learning styles there is no wrong or right teaching style and it is impossible to classify each teacher with a single teaching style.
I have found that throughout my teaching practice I have made many other decisions based upon the same intuitive feelings I adopted in my microteach, and the majority have turned out to be the right choices. One example of this took place during my first lesson observation. Upon entering the classroom I was asked by a number of students for help in their assignment that was due in later that day. Although I had a lesson plan prepared that would cover the length of the entire session I felt that it would be more beneficial to the students, and also encourage a policy of openness, if I adapted my plans to condense my study topics in the first part of the session. This would allow the students the second part of the lesson to work on their assignment and request help if they needed it. I felt this lesson worked well and this is reflected in the encouraging comments on my lesson observation. Claxton has offered an interpretation of these intuitive feelings. Claxton argues in his article Knowing Without Knowing Why that "one acts intuitively before one is able to act rationally, or even 'wittingly'" (Claxton, 1998, p.217). I believe that I have followed Claxton's theory of intuitive learning (Claxton, 1990) in the development of my teaching style. However, it could also be argued that I have drawn upon the theory presented by Gestalt as he argues "learning is a complex process of interrelationships which occur as a result of engaging with a new problem in the light of previous experience" (Armitage, 1999, p. 61). As I had received no formal teacher training I drew upon my prior experience as a learner and adapted it intuitively to attempt to meet the needs of the students. It could be argued that as a new inexperienced teacher with no formal teacher training you simply adopt the style and mannerisms of a teacher, or teachers, that you aspire towards from your own educational experiences. As the majority of my learning has taken place in a formal structured environment I intuitively adopted this approach in my own teaching style. When I began teaching I saw the classroom with a strong division between myself as the teacher and the students as the learners. I believe I was practising in a pedagogical manner. I treated the students as an empty vessel waiting to be filled with the knowledge of IT. I soon discovered that this was not the case and have adapted my teaching style accordingly to respect the views and opinions of the learners whilst still imparting the knowledge and skills that are crucial to their success in key skills IT. One way in which I have implemented this change is through a policy of openness with the students.
During the microteach I adopted an approach of openness by communicating my feelings and doubts about my original lesson plan to the group. This gave the group the opportunity to express any reservations they might have had about the change of plan, and also allowed me to feel comfortable and explain the reasons for my decision. This is reflective of the way I teach my sessions within my teaching practice. I believe that my present teaching style allows me to respect the peer culture of the students as well as implement learning. In my lesson observation for this PGCE course I took a group of students, studying for National Diploma in Animal Care, with whom I have worked since the beginning of their course at the college. They were a group whose peer culture was, and still is, very strong. With this group I have tried to institute a policy of openness and realness from the start. One of the reasons that I felt I could be open with this group is because during my part-time teaching I had worked with the previous year's intake to the same course. I had enjoyed my lessons with them as I felt that the students were giving back to me everything that I was putting into the planning and preparation. Rogers argues that "When the facilitator is a real person, being what she is, entering into a relationship with the learner without presenting a front or a façade, she is much more likely to be effective" (Rogers, 1983, p.121). Reflecting upon my lesson observation I considered why I felt my experience with this group to be so successful. During the initial lessons with the group I drew firm boundaries and although I actively encouraged debate and discussion in the classes I would not offer any personal information about myself. One of the reasons for this was because I am aware of both my height and my age. One of the difficulties in teaching young students when you are a young lecturer is gaining the respect of the learners. From my experience of the body and voice workshop during this course I would argue that it is easier to gain respect and for others to consider you of a 'high status' if you are tall and well dressed. I am 5'1" and I tend to feel more comfortable in trainers and jumpers than suits, but for my first few lessons of the semester I wore heels and smart clothes. This not only gave me confidence, it also distinguished me from the students.
One methodology that I favour for teaching and that was not reflected during the microteach is encouraging peer support during lessons. Throughout both my lesson observations I have encouraged peer teaching. In my first observation I asked one of the students to aid me in walking the room to check that everyone was following the session exercises. This is because the student has prior knowledge from IT courses taken in another country, but she is required to study for the IT key skills qualification as her previous study does not exempt her from the British education requirements. Rather than have her sit and repeat exercises that she already knows how to do I would rather she actively participate in sessions and consolidate her prior learning. Vygotsky would argue that "by explaining to and helping the other child, [s]he may well gain a greater explicit understanding of his [her] own learning" (Sutherland, 1992, p. 48). Vygotsky’s advocated the value of formal, structured teaching but he also valued “the child as an active learner” (Sutherland, 1992, p. 52). Vygotsky encourages seeing the picture as a whole and argues that all influences on learning should be taken into account in order to maximise the options for the child to reach their full potential as a learner and work within what he calls the zone of proximal development. As well as improving the students' own learning this type of approach to the lesson also helps to create a relaxed environment for the other learners in the group, and I have found that some students would prefer to ask their peers for help rather than a teaching figure.
In conclusion I feel that my teaching style is constantly changing and adapting to new situations and new experiences. Using the reflective tool of praxis I am building new lesson plans and new methodologies based upon my experiences in the classroom. I feel that my teaching style is flexible and can alter depending on a number of factors. When planning these lessons I always try to take into the subject being taught, the mood of the students and the environment in which I am to teach as well as considering situations in my life and even things such as the weather, which although seem trivial can have an impact on the students' behaviour. I believe in adopting a policy of openness with the learners and I actively promote peer teaching as advocated by Vygotsky. I particularly like working with a student centred approach and I feel that with the subjects that I teach there is no replacement for practical sessions and workshops. However, I hope that I am flexible enough to adopt new methodologies and instruments for teaching as are appropriate to the learners in every new situation. Only time will tell.
Word Count: 2,897
Bibliography
Armitage, A et al. (1999) Teaching and Training in Post-Compulsory Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Brookfield, S. (1995) Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Inc.
Claxton, G. (1990) "Teaching to Learn" in Why Education Needs Ideas. London: Cassell Education Ltd.
Claxton, G. (1998) “Investigating human intuition: Knowing without knowing why” in he Psychologist, pp. 217-220.
Claxton, G. (2000) "The anatomy of intuition" in Atkinson, T (ed). The Intuitive Practitioner. Buckingham: Open University Press.
FEDA Further Education and Development Agency (1995) Learning Styles. London: Further Education and Development Agency
Honey, P (ud) Learning Styles and Learning Styles Questionnaire
Knowles, M.S. (1978) Adult Learner 'a neglected species'. Houston: Gulf Publishers.
Knowles, M.S. (1980) “What is Andragogy?”. In: Knowles, M.S (1980) The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy to Andragogy. New Jersey: Cambridge Adult Education.
Kolb, D. (1984) The process of experiential learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Newman, S. (1999) Philosophy and Teacher Education: A reinterpretation of Donald A Schön's epistemology of reflective practice. Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Rogers, C. (1983) Freedom to Learn for the 80's. Colombus: Charles Merrill Publishing Company.
Sutherland, P. (1992) Cognitive Development Today: Piaget and his critics. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Appendix
- Initial Microteach Lesson Plan
- Initial Microteach Handout
- Teaching Observation One
- Teaching Observation Two
The lesson plan and handout that I planned to use for the session can be seen as Appendix one and two.
The first lesson observation form can be seen as Appendix three.
The second lesson observation form can be seen as Appendix four.