The first activity had the same basic structure from her last activity. The difference that I noticed was that the instructor had printed the movie poster colored, added keywords, and put screenshots of the movie on the paper. She also separated the answers from the first material(paper) given to the students, so that the students could not peek at the answers this time. I thought that the improvements that she had made was more impressive.
The materials given to this activity were two pieces of paper, one containing the instructions and colored pictures of the movie and the other including the summary. The first paper was given at the beginning of the activity and the latter was given when the groups had finished discussing about the activities. The activity was to guess what the movie [Big Momma's House] was about in groups, and then to present it to another group.
In our group, the instructor kept giving us hints what the actual movie was about. Our group ended up thinking up a plot that was similar to the movie. However, I felt that the instructor needed to think more about the goal of the activity; what I saw as the goal of the activity was to get the students speak and inspire their creativity, encouraging them to talk about what they think. The other group added this extra called Billy Joe Bob; it was creative for them to name all the extras and create stories for them. A student helped the other when she had problems during the presentation process.
Therefore, this activity was meaningful in that the students able to discuss their thoughts about what the movie might be. It was also comprehensible, but some words written in the 2nd piece of paper contained some words I have never heard of(matriarch, corpulent, septuagenarian). To add, the activity served its pedagogical goal since people do not usually discuss the synopsis of old movies this detailed out of class. The students had to be involved in both speaking, but the writing process was selective. The students also struggled when they had to present their results while looking at the notes made by a single person in the group, so it seemed the activity could improve if the instructor recommended everyone to write down notes. Speaking of problems, the not all students were actively involved in the activity. In our group, in which the instructor was in, I was the one who was actively involved. The other student, other than the instructor, was also willing to speak, but she did not participate as much as I did. Thus, I felt the need that the instructor have to provide opportunities and encourage these people to speak during the discussion.
I also thought that the activity could get much more interesting when the screen captures of the movie were not directly related to the main story of the movie; the compare and contrast process would be more exciting this way.
2.Our Neighborhood
Stars for the activity:
In the activity, students had to redesign Cheongpa-dong while keeping the roads and the public facilities. A lot of materials were used than usual. Students were given a piece of paper containing the instructions on the beginning of the activity.
They were also given a blank piece of paper per group for the groups to map out what their ideas. Later, the students had to draw their designs on a larger piece of paper, using colorful markers and pencils. The students then had to present their results to the other group.
The instructor was roaming around the room, asking the students on what they were working on and suggesting ideas for the students to discuss. It was the first activity held in our group that I felt as if the instructor was in charge of the situations. The instructor extended time when the students asked for them, only a little bit, so that students will get time to finish on what they are working on and not move to a new activity. The professor managed the time in a way so that the students did not spend a large portion of time to draw the map, but on discussion.
What I found as a possible problem in this activity was that the professor was not able to control time when viewed from another perspective. It was too tight to squeeze in the thinking process and drawing it on the large piece of papers, leaving time for presentation. I felt that it is unnecessary to use the big sheet of paper, and it took too much room enough for me to feel uncomfortable. On the other hand, I thought that the presentation involved participation from people who were hesitant to participate in the first activity, thanks to the large material. In a nutshell, I thought that it would be better for the instructor to give about 5 more minutes, a total of 35 minutes when conducting this activity. Also, the instructor could ask the students to draw the map on a piece of A4 paper instead, emphasizing the fact that everyone has to participate. The impact given by the material will not be as big, but I thought that it will good enough as a substitute to fit in the 30-minutes time limit.
So the activity was meaningful in that the students were interested in renewing the neighborhood that their school was located. It was also comprehensible, and when the students had problems understanding what was written in the paper, the instructor would explain them in more detail so that the students will have no problems participating in the activity. Moreover, the activity served its pedagogical goal to make students speak actively and explain their ideas to others. This was possible since the students were able to have a common feature as their topic. Additionally, the students were able to connect this to real life, increasing the authenticity involved within the activity. This encouraged the students to be involved in constructionism, resulting in deeper learning than just listening for the students.
__________________
Anonymous
Date:
RE: teaching Listening and Speaking (Spring 2019) - Week 6 Reflections for Wonderful
We were given a piece of paper written the instructions of the activity, and the professor explained them to us. Our task was to redesign Cheong Pa dong, and we had to choose the materials for reconstruction. Before we start the activity, we were divided into 2 groups. Our job was to redesign the buildings and landscapes of Cheong Pa dong, to draw them and to present the drawing to the other group.
Since every student was familiar with Cheong Pa dong, it was easy to derive students interest. Since the activity contained various kind of tasks, it was dynamic too. Also, the time allotment was systemic because there was a time limit of each task, and the professor directed students to keep the given time properly. While doing this activity, students should practice translating their thoughts from Korean to English and explain them with their own words, which are essential process of speaking. At the same time, other students talking became listening input. Consequently, from this activity, students could practice meaningful speaking and listening.
The overall activity was well-designed and the performances were great. The instructions were clear and appropriate. Still, if I have to pinpoint a small downside, I think it would have been better if the students had been allocated a certain role. If every students had gotten a certain role, there wouldnt have been passive students.
Ju youngs material
The task of the activity was the same with the previous one. We had to guess the story of the movie. But, unlike the previous one, the information of the movie was added more with the movie poster, such as the genre of the movie, name of the main character and minor characters and some still cuts of the movie.
The pedagogical goal was also similar to the former activity. While guessing the story of the movie, students had to find the proper words which describe their thoughts themselves. And others speaking became listening input. The purpose of this activity, to have students speak and discuss freely, was good. However, the structure of the activity was quite loose and the time allotment was not very systemic.
I think it would have been more effective if there had been more various tasks such as making their own version of movie scenario after checking the summary of the movie. And it would have been more effective if the material designer had performed as an instructor instead of participating in a group activity. By doing so, it is easier to guide students to keep time limit and lead passive students to participate more.
__________________
Anonymous
Date:
RE: teaching Listening and Speaking (Spring 2019) - Week 6 Reflections for Wonderful
When I had to prepare material hosting, I thought a lot. I had to prepare activities to speak and listen effectively in English. Prior to the preparation, I was able to refer to the preparation process through the activities that professor prepared in class. The learning I learned from the activities I did in class is that students are not used to speaking in English, usually when English is a second language. It was the learning from this activity that allowed students to listen and speak English naturally as they participated in the activity. So I prepared an activity to make a story, so that I could express as many thoughts as possible in words. In fact, one of the activities the professor prepared in the previous class was similar to the one called "story retelling," where few examples were given. However, my planned activity is to only look at the movie posters and titles and think about what they might contain and make a story through dialogue. They talk together about making a story. The process took about 20 minutes. After 20 minutes, students presented about 5 minutes of each other's thinking. And as a final step, the other five minutes end up reading the actual story on the back of the paper and comparing it to what they're different from. It was my first time preparing for the material hosting, so I was very nervous. I wondered if my planned activities could represent effective speaking and listening. However, I was happy that students exchanged their opinions better than I thought, and I was satisfied with the various stories. It was a bit disappointing that the time difference between teams was slightly different than what I had planned because it was about 10 minutes different from what I had known. If I had known the added time, I might have prepared some hints and other kinds of suggestions. I will look at the students' reflections and prepare it more perfectly next time.
-Professors activity
The next activity was that prepared by the professor. The kitchen drawing consisted of two different versions, A and B, and the professor distributed different paper to the students. So the student with A and B became a team and exchanged conversations. The rules of this activity were not to show each other's picture, but to compare how many kitchen utensils each had through conversation, and to see which side's kitchen was in better condition. I began to share the quantity of utensils in the kitchen with my partner. In general, I had a lot of supplies in my kitchen drawing. We shared all the supplies, such as the location of the windows, the number of spiders, the number of chairs, and everything in the picture. I shared it in detail because I had more time, and in the end it became me who had a kitchen in a better condition. This activity was more about finding answers through a simple conversation than rolling my head. It was simple but fun and naturally speaking and listening activities. What I was a bit disappointing was that the picture was a little small, so there was plenty of time left. If the picture was bigger and the type of painting varied, I think there would be more to talk about.
__________________
Anonymous
Date:
RE: teaching Listening and Speaking (Spring 2019) - Week 6 Reflections for Wonderful
In this week, the instructors second activity was exactly same with her first activity which was to guess the summary of the movie with just a movie poster, but she made some improvements on her task. (Of course she picked a new movie Big Mommas House.) I remember that the papers she handed out to us last time were printed in black and white, so it was difficult to figure out the movie poster. However, at this time, those were printed in color so that we all could feel comfortable with guessing the answer. In addition, the material she gave us in the beginning of the activity provided us the name of the main character, some keywords, and screenshots of a few parts of the movie to help us make a guess more easily than the last time. Overall, the improvements she had made were all comprehensible to all of us. Anyway, after that, she divided us into two groups and then led us to discuss the movie poster. When we had finished our discussion, we shared the storylines that we created for 20 minutes. At the end of the activity, the instructor gave us another material including the actual summary of the movie.
I was in the same group with the professor and he said that he already had watched that movie, so he just pretended he doesnt know anything about it. And then, only the other member and I tried to make any guesses so that we could make creative stories. On the other hand, I saw the instructor in the other group giving her group members some hints about the actual summary of the movie. I think thats why the plot they came up with was very much like the original one. I thought that one of the pedagogical goals of this activity was to encourage the students to think creatively while speaking. However, at this point, I think the instructor failed to accomplish this goal.
In this activity, all of the students could take turns to share their ideas and speak their thoughts freely, but not everyone could participate in the writing process. For example, when it was time to share our thoughts, I was the one who had to be in charge of presenting out results with the notes written by someone else. However, I struggled with reading the handwriting and I felt so embarrassed. Accordingly, I thought that the activity could get much better when the chance to write down notes was given to everyone.
2) Redesigning a map
This activity was to redesign a map of Cheongpa-dong with some limitations and there were several materials needed for this activity, such as a large paper, markers, and color pencils. To start with, the instructor handed out a paper with the instructions to each of us and then we were divided into two groups. After that, each group got a blank sheet of paper from the instructor for making an outline with our ideas, and then we had to draw our final designs on another large piece of paper with using some markers. When we have done that, we had to have a short presentation about our designs.
While having a conversation with each other, the instructor kept getting around both groups and he constantly asked some questions to the students. He also tried to make any suggestions or ideas for us. To add, he was very attentive to all of the students and he encouraged us to be participated actively in the activity. Even though the rest was all fine, only one thing which was unsatisfactory was that the instructor set the time too tightly. Frankly, as soon as I saw the size of the papers and lots of materials before the activity starts, I was not sure if we could do something on such short notice. As I was concerning, everyone seemed to be pressed for time, but we had barely finished our works. It was really hard to control time and I was driven by impetuosity while doing this activity. Also, I thought it would be better for us to use the smaller paper because it made us feel pressured that we had to fill this large piece of paper in so short a space of time. Thus, I thought that it would be good for everyone if the instructor gives us a little more time.
Overall, this activity was worthwhile and everything was comprehensible. Whats more, this activity served almost all of its pedagogical goals to inspire students to think creatively, encourage them to share their ideas to others, and help them to speak actively with confidence. It also was one of the meaningful activities focusing on interaction between partners so that we could create a sense of teamwork though this activity.
This week we has two tasks that came back in revised form from the first Materials Hosting session. Let's take a look at them.
The first one was from Juyoung. The main functional goal of the task is to tell a story. And Juyoung made several improvements on the first task. Essentially she provided more scaffolding for the task. there were more pictures which could be used to help construct the story. And that was good. This time was picked a movie that was older that she was quite confident no one had seen, so that was also better controlled. What was missing in general and this seems to be the case on most of the Materials that people are hosting is the overarching reason for doing the task. I know we are in a classroom, an unnatural place, but we want to try to make more connections to the real world. In essence, why are people telling the story? Do they have their own personal goals? When we speak it is always to achieve a certain purpose. Even in the classroom, we need to go to pains to try to make sure students are aware of their purpose. And students might have cross purposes. These are stand-alone tasks and not part of any specific lesson plan so it might be good to try to create little mini missions or projects and it is easy to do that with sporty-telling.
The second task we did was my great ,leap. it was a great leap in that the task we tried was an extension of the description task we did in the first Materials Hosting, but it was made a fair bit more complicated. There were multiple stages and a lot more freer types of interaction in this opinion gap task. Essentially, students were tasked with redesigning Cheongpa-dong, the neighborhood around our university. This is something fun and presumably engaging because everyone is very familiar with Cheongpa-dong and I do always hear students gripping about the lack of many things in the neighborhood.
The plan was ambitious and reliant on the ability of the students to work quickly together. In doing so they need to engage in a lot of negotiation, as long as everyone is engaged. I was really not sure how much we would be able to get done in the scant 30 minutes allowed. A task like this occurs in multiple stages and each stage takes several minutes. Teachers need to be flexible on the time for each stage because the goal is to mover forward achieving each goal through interaction. But in this case, we were limited by a strict time table, which can be detrimental in that it puts task-completion ahead of language use and development.
All in all, I thought the students performed well in most of the stages. The final stage was severely rushed, but that is the least important stage. And the drawing is intended to merely scaffold the speaking, so it is also not very important although on the scale of things students do often get caught up in the drawing part.
