Teach English in Donghu Zhen - Wuwei Shi

My reflection after watching each film: First film: The teacher's attitude from the start was very presumptuous. He used confusing technical terms, and then said it was easy. When the students didn't answer, he acted like they were stupid. Then when he wrote examples on the board, they were dry, and he didn't encourage enough class participation. Then the dreaded handout happened, and he was insulting again, presuming that it wasn't hard. The worst part was when the class reviewed the handout. The english pronunciation of \"can\" and \"can't\" can sound very similar to a non-native speaker. A better way of reviewing the handout would be to have it projected or on power point, so that the students could see the correct answer circled. The class wasn't very large, and teacher didn't make much of an effort to learn the students' names. Then, when they were asked about what animals can or can't do, the teacher was curt when they made an effort, and didn't give any positive feedback. The other problem was the animals that the teacher chose for the handout. The students may not even be very familiar with those animals, or may not have enough vocabulary base to describe the animal's' actions. The game also went on for a long time, I got bored after the first two animals. Then a second handout came, which was based on the same presumptions. The students were given answers, but the teacher never explained why that was the correct answer, and there were no visual aids to demonstrate the action, which would make it very difficult for a student to retain. With the imagination animal activity, the teacher's instructions were very vague, and he attempted to give an example, but then didn't. If he can't give an example, how can he expect the students to know what to do? Then, he picks up a book as if his work is done. When the class finishes, he starts asking them questions they weren't prepared for. He asks how many arms/ feet, etc., which wasn't even covered in the lesson. There also weren't any examples of verbs they could use to describe what an imaginary animal can or can't do, and so it put a lot of pressure on their ability to recall, instead of making it fun. Instead of picking up on this, the teacher just rushed through students' answers, and if they seemed to not understand, there was no follow-up. The entire method put a lot of pressure on the students, and really killed morale. Second film: The teacher started out with a smile, and he asked for students' names. This was a good ice breaker, and then it was followed with an engage activity, which was missing in the other lesson. The teacher also enunciated much more clearly right off, and used gestures to emphasize his words. It seemed like the teacher saw the students' reluctance when he described the activity to think of animals, and he immediately passed our paper, and paired them off, so that it took less pressure off of the individual. It also encouraged participation, without seeming too pushy. The instructions were repeated, and the teacher gave a time frame for them to work with as well. During the two minutes, the teacher was standing ready in case a student had a question, instead of sitting. The students were given the opportunity to give their own animal names, the ones they are familiar with. This helped the teacher to know their skill level, and it avoided the problem in the other video of the students not knowing enough about the animals the teacher had chosen. It also kept them focused, and built confidence because the teacher gave positive feedback about the number of animals they came up with. During the activity, the students really loosened up, and the teacher was able to guage when some follow up questions were appropriate. He started to ask specific students questions about the penguin, in a casual way, to encourage description words from them. Then, when he wanted a more difficult answer, he gave clues that could be understood, and they were able to come to the answer. Then the teacher gave positive remarks when they came to the answer. To let the words sink in further, the teacher had pictures of the animals and had the students state what the animal was, which was also a good pronunciation exercise. If the students were a little off on pronunciation, the teacher was not critical, he simply pointed out the specific sound that was a little off, and the class repeated it. Then the teacher moved on to verbs, which built up to the point of the lesson, which was to say what animals can or can't do. He gave actions to demonstrate a specific verb, instead of asking the class to just say one. This allowed their brains to make connections, instead of putting pressure on them to think spontaneously of any given verb. It also gave the teacher an idea of which verbs they were more familiar with, and could use as examples. Toward the end, the teacher then asked the class to think of some things, after their confidence had built. It was a better way to challenge the class, without discouraging participation. After the verb introduction, the teacher gave an example of what he was looking for, the word \"can\