ISL WEEK 8

Reflection
I think that, for the most part, the lesson went well, but there are several things I would do differently. 1. I would choose a less complex family than mine to use for the introductory example. I would use a generic photo of a typical nuclear family with grandparents, parents, and a son and a daughter and save my family photo for later in the unit when we would discuss more complex family configurations. I would also write the vocabulary for these basic family members on the board so the students would have an adequate framework for identifying family members on the introductory page of the lesson. 2. I could have used the document camera to project a copy of the introductory page and the handout. I could then label the copies as if I were projecting onto a marker board. The other option would be to write (or ask a student volunteer to write) the elicited vocabulary and answers to the handout questions on the chalkboard in the room. I didnt do that because of the logistics of the setup, but maybe I could have turned the computer 180 degrees and taught from a place between the computer and the blackboard. 3. When reviewing the answers to the questions on the handout, I should have done it more slowly, playing each conversation separately to confirm the content. 4. In my actual classroom, I would have taken more time with the discussion, clarifying vocabulary as it came up (e.g., I would have followed up with the mention of horchata to make sure everyone knew what it is). I revised my lesson activities in part d) above to reflect some of these hindsight changes in my lesson.
I liked the fact that the students were engaged and willing to participate in the activities and discussions. Before the lesson, and during the first part, I was uncomfortable about the need to improvise on my preferred classroom setup. This discomfort was complicated by my realization that my family photo was too complex to use for a simple introduction. During the lesson, and especially toward the end, I was very uncomfortable about the time constraint, and I rushed parts that I would have normally taken more time with. When it was over, I felt a little frustrated that I didnt have time to complete the listening activity. On a more positive note, I can say that I believe the activities and class dynamics reflected my teaching principles. Actually, principle #1, build a community of learners, was already established as we (students in this class) already felt a sense of community with each other and were comfortable taking risks in the classroom. I provided comprehensible (i+1) input (principle #2) through repeated listening to conversations that used the same basic formula. Students had opportunity for supported output (principle #3) in reporting back from the group work near the beginning of the lesson and in volunteering information in the general

discussion of the pictures shown. I wasnt able to fully implement principle #4 (integrated listening, speaking, reading, and writing activities) in this lesson, as it was primarily speaking with a very limited amount of reading. However, the content of this lesson will be connected to speaking, reading, and writing activities in follow-up lessons. I did not do any error correction (principle #5, isolated and integrated Form-Focused Instruction), as this lesson was the introduction to the unit, so it would not have been appropriate or helpful to correct errors at this point. The main thing I learned from feedback and reflection on this lesson is to make sure my introduction to a lesson is simple and focused. In addition, a couple of people suggested that it would be good to check for comprehension after each conversation instead of playing one example conversation followed by the other five without a break. I incorporated this change into my revised lesson plan for the second playing. I think its good to play all the conversations together for the first pass to foster independence and minimize reliance on teacher as authorit