Observation #4

Observation #4

This visit to Central Falls, we did a specific data gathering method that they like to refer to as a walkthrough.  The method basically consists of walking into a classroom with a group of people for no more than 5 minutes, and then exiting into the hallway where the group that just observed the class has a small deliberation about what they just witnessed.  The people doing the walk through were looking for specific things such as: content area, grade level, class size, how the class was configured, what the teacher was doing, what the students were doing, if the students were engaged in the lesson, level of Bloom’s Taxonomy, assessment, links to Common Core, and literacy strategies.  We had a checklist that we would collaboratively decide upon after the observation, and then that data gets submitted for further analysis.

My first thought about these walkthroughs, was that I thought it was a complete waste of time.  I thought that we were not in the classrooms long enough to make any sort of reasonable judgment or assessment of what we observed.  But luckily, the principal explained the significance of each brief observation in our meeting after our walkthroughs.  These brief data collections are compiled and looked at holistically at different levels, such as grade and subject.  Also, they are not intended to put added stress on individual teachers, but rather they are used as a gauge of instruction quality at a broad level.  This way, professional development can be focused upon where the data shows it is needed, and other issues can be addressed at department level, rather than focusing in on one teacher.

The entire process was very impressive.  As I stated before, I was uncertain about its effectiveness at first, but now I believe it is a great tool for improvement.  Not only does this system provide great introspective data, but it might also inspire current teachers to be their best without the direct risk of their own reputation on the line every time someone comes in to observe them.       

Observation #3

Observation #3

This visit to central falls, we went into several classrooms and focused on which questions were being asked, both by students and the teachers.  We were also asked to determine which level of Bloom’s Taxonomy the questions we observed were.  Unfortunately, the classes we went into and the short amount of time we spent in each did not allow us to see too many great questions being asked, but that is not to say we did not hear any.

One calculus class I observed did not include any memorable or relatable questions.  This is mostly because the students were busy doing work they had been assigned.  However, I did observe another math class and a science lab that included some decent questions by both the teacher and the students.  In the science class, I witnessed engaged students that asked clarifying questions to the teacher pertaining to the lab they were performing.  Then in the other math class, the teacher asked one student, “If you have a revenue function, then how did you get it?”  There were also a few other questions by the teacher to the students that challenged the students through the exercise. 

In my opinion, this visit was not very beneficial to my future career as a teacher.  I feel this exercise could have been better if we had more time to spend in more classrooms.  Looking for the specific questions that are asked in a classroom is a worthwhile exercise, but we needed more time.  However, the process itself has had an effect on me and made me more weary or aware of what or which questions I will be asking my students.  Therefore, the experience was not a total loss.

Professional Development Reflection

The professional development I attended this semester was the RI Writing Project here at RIC.  It was a fun, interesting, and constructive day that reflected the many themes that I am studying this semester.  The keynote speaker and the seminars I attended directly related literacy to content, which is now required by Common Core Standards, and provided unique ideas that I will be able to use in my classroom.

The keynote speaker, Thomas Newkirk, spoke about purposeful and meaningful writing and reading and how they need to be personal, fun, and engaging in order for anyone to commit to them.  He used an example of how stories before literature were initially in spoken form, and engaging to listen to because they told an interesting tale with meaning or reason.  Newkirk claimed that in the vast world of literature and academia, this fundamental characteristic of discourse has been lost and that many types of literature have become dull or uninteresting to read.  He added that textbooks are too large, hard to read, and there is no story involved, which makes them difficult to get excited about.  Therefore, he argued that the literature that students read needs to figuratively “form an itch that needs to be scratched” with further investigative reading.  This concept provides engaging interest that fuels self-guided learning, which is what we need to present to our students.

I also attended a seminar that involved improving literacy through different strategies that allowed the attendees to be personally reflective through a manifesto creation workshop.  The technique used forced everyone to recall the reasons we decided to become teachers and brainstorm through other questions, and then combine the thoughts into a manifesto.  It was a worthwhile exercise that I will most likely use in one form or another in my future classroom.

The RI Writing Project was a successful and beneficial event.  It was fun and interesting, which was exactly the main point of the entire conference.  It took the concept of recreating the instruction of reading and writing into a fun and exciting process, and did so by example.