I just had a conversation with a teacher. He is good teacher. Engaging, creative and caring. He was being observed the other day by a mentor. He had a solid, high interest lesson based on curriculum and student input.
He created a Jeopardy game with categories based on the Revolutionary war. There was also a random category and a category for technology knowledge.
The students were all engaged, learning and, gasp, interested in the content. His mentor told him that she didn't want to use this lesson as a formal observation because there wasn't enough of him teaching.
My initial reaction was that teaching isn't about the teacher standing in front of the students but rather the students learning. It was obvious that there was teaching happening. However, the student learning was huge in this lesson.
Your thoughts?
Q is for Quality.
He created a Jeopardy game with categories based on the Revolutionary war. There was also a random category and a category for technology knowledge.
The students were all engaged, learning and, gasp, interested in the content. His mentor told him that she didn't want to use this lesson as a formal observation because there wasn't enough of him teaching.
My initial reaction was that teaching isn't about the teacher standing in front of the students but rather the students learning. It was obvious that there was teaching happening. However, the student learning was huge in this lesson.
Your thoughts?
Q is for Quality.
Completely agree. Formal observations that require the teacher to lecture or direct the entire lesson help put a rubber stamp on the notion that the only good lesson is a teacher directed one.
ReplyDelete