Diploma in English Language Teaching Methodology (Diplomado) Final Report: Thomas Baker


Published on

International Diploma in English Language Teaching Methodology

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Diploma in English Language Teaching Methodology (Diplomado) Final Report: Thomas Baker

  1. 1. 1 Bridge IDELT™-NNEST Trainee Final Report NAME OF TRAINEE Thomas Baker COURSE DATES and LOCATION 17th May – 13th September, 2010. Universidad Finis Terrae, Santiago, Chile. COURSE GRADING: DESCRIPTION AND SUMMARY OF TRAINEE PERFORMANCE FOR EACH COMPONENT Teaching Practice and Lesson Planning Component Abbreviations: Ss= Students, RSLP= Receptive Skills Lesson Plan, m/p/f= meaning, pronunciation, form, LP= lesson plan, CCQs=concept checking questions, TL= Target Language, PPP=Present, Practice, P roduce, STT=Student Talk Time, TTT=Teacher Talk Time, ICQs=Instruction Check Questions, LA= Language Analysis, mgt= management TP Date & Level & OVERALL COMMENTS FOR LESSON PLANNING AND DELIVERY: Major Lesson Plan Teaching # Length Type of strengths and weaknesses Grade Practice Lesson Grade + Awesome 1st attempt, awesome visuals - Include all headings in procedures, have a stronger production (real-life Grade: Grade: 5/27/10 situations). q Un-graded q Un-graded Beginner q Fail q Fail + Great rapport, energy & sense of humour, good teaching techniques. (use 1 60 Vocabulary q Pass q Pass minutes (occupations) CCQs, ICQs, choral drills, elicit, gesture), good monitoring of Ss’ work & lots of S-S interaction. q Good q Good - Less T led/ presence, lower TTT further (echo/running commentary), simplify n Excellent n Excellent instructions/model activities. + Good variety of activities, good content knowledge - State all CCQs and ICQs in procedures, further elaborate procedures/ script Grade: *Split Grade: *Split directives, more detailed & specific lesson aims. q Un-graded q Un-graded 6/24/10 Beginner q q 2 + Good teaching techniques (personalisation of TL, use of board, use of Fail Fail 60 Grammar q q rhythm), good monitoring, conductive learning environment, good wrap up. Pass Pass minutes (Past simple) n Good n Good - Further simplify & slow down instructions, model instructions more, specific ICQs, time mgt, material coverage, lower TTT (echo/running commentary n Excellent n Excellent further) + Awesome power point, visuals, topic. - Work on timing of stages (reduce presentation, increase production), elaborate Grade: Grade: Beginner procedures further, more emphasis on TL (sequence markers): in order to q Un-graded q Un-graded 8/19/10 q Fail q Fail Functional achieve/ meet lesson aims. 3 60 q Pass q Pass Language + Good use of gestures/scaffolding, good rapport, good CCQs, drilling & minutes n n monitoring. Good Good - reduce TTT, more activities to incorporate linkers (TL), time mgt, echo/running q Excellent q Excellent commentary, grade language further, more modelling of instructions. + Good topic choice, good activities Grade: *Split Grade: - Work on assumptions & anticipated problems. q Un-graded q Un-graded 9/02/10 Beginner + Good T positioning, T presence, good amount of repetition, good use of q Fail q Fail 4 60 Functional gestures & TPR (Total Physical Response) approach, good praise & q Pass q Pass minutes Language encouragement. n Good q Good - Clarify meaning, more pronunciation drills, continue to work on shortening & n simplifying instructions for beginner Ss. n Excellent Excellent Grade: Grade: + Good teaching techniques: ICQs, eliciting, drilling, good lesson flow & 9/02/10 n Un-graded q Un-graded 8° grade structure, good T’s ear, good T positioning, good content knowledge, good q Fail 5 45 praises and encouragement, good exposition, set objectives at the beginning of q Fail Speaking q q Pass minutes the lesson. Pass (on-site) (Drama) q Good q Good - Echo q Excellent n Excellent Grade: Grade: 9/02/10 n Un-graded q Un-graded 6 12° grade + Very good classroom mgt, good flow & good amount of STT, good facilitation, q Fail 45 good content knowledge, good eliciting, quick thinking & good adaptation of q Fail Speaking q q Pass minutes (Drama) lesson. Pass (on-site) q Good q Good q Excellent n Excellent Written Assignment Component Assignment Grade Professional Development Paper Excellent Thomas, we appreciate the fortitude you showed during the course. You were always prepared and contributed greatly to class. Your thoughts and insights are reflective of the work and dedication you demonstrated through out this course. Thank you for your sincerity and clarity in expressing yourself. Your ability to process and then apply the knowledge and feedback you received during the course into your lesson plans was exceptional. We appreciated your genuine participation and drive for success. Grammar Paper: Excellent Your research and analysis of the grammar point you selected, passive voice, was thorough and well-organized. I would like to have seen a more grammatical aspect of it, though. As for the lesson plan, it is excellent. However, rather than using the PPP, it would be more appropriate to use the TTT (Test Teach Test) format instead. © Bridge-Linguatec, Inc.
  2. 2. 2 Independent Task 1 - Guided Evaluation Task: Excellent Although it’s hard to critique yourself, your report was excellent. You were able to review yourself by video and reflect positively on your performance. Independent Task 2 - CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) Lesson Plan: Excellent The premise of your CALL (using the passive voice in an academic paper) was excellent and the corresponding lesson plan well done as well. However, the PPP model would not be the best suited format to use; the TBL (Task- Based Lesson) approach would have been better. Hopefully you will be able to use this lesson someday! Portfolio Collection: Complete Your portfolio is complete including the make up work of missed input session(s): Role of a Teacher, classroom Mgt 1, Functions, Activities 2: Games, Connected Speech, and Business English. Participation in Input Component Thomas showed preparedness during input sessions. He was able to keep up with daily reading and homework assignments. His comments were relevant to the daily topics. He willingly offered comments as well as clarifications for his own learning. When working in groups or pairs, he often led discussions, participated willingly and offered assistance to group-mates. Feedback Component Thomas’s observation and feedback demonstrated his own learning by not only recognizing what worked and didn’t work, but by offering solutions. His comments were positive, precise, accurate, and helpful. He was professional in his delivery during the feedback sessions. FINAL GRADING (Percentages reflect weight of final grade) The components for the final grading are as follows: Weight Component Grade Final Course Grade Teaching Practice (Execution of lesson): 40% Excellent Excellent Feedback (Self and peer observations): 10% Excellent *The final course grade reflects the grade Planning and Preparation: 15% Excellent average of all five components. The final grade Written Assignments: 20% Excellent is determined by adding the percentages (i.e. Participation in Input: 15% Excellent weight) of each component’s grade together. The highest percentage indicates the grade of Total : 100% Excellent, Good or Pass. OVERALL COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Thomas worked conscientiously throughout the course and fulfilled all requirements to pass including submitting a final portfolio of all coursework and grading materials. Thomas consistently and convincingly: • Established excellent rapport with the group of adult beginner students he taught and developed excellent classroom management skills. • Assessed learner needs in order to plan and teach lessons which take account of learners’ backgrounds, learning preferences and current needs. • Used and adapted materials effectively and efficiently to prepare and execute lessons designed to develop learners’ overall language competency by defining and analyzing the language systems and language skills (reading, writing, listening, speaking) as well as how they are learned. His lesson ideas are excellent, and his language analysis and awareness are very good. • Demonstrated his understanding of teaching methods and techniques as well as language awareness through writing his own lessons based upon material appropriate for the class level by implementing what was presented in input sessions, through executing teaching practice classes, and through producing written assignments on the following topics: grammar/language skills related tasks, teaching skills related tasks and professional development tasks. • Demonstrated to his trainers’ satisfaction that he is exceptionally skilled with the planning and presentation of m aterial to learners of English as a Foreign Language in the areas of: conversation, listening, grammar, function, pronunciation, vocabulary, reading, and writing using The Communicative Approach as the foundation for all activities in his classes. In addition, Thomas covered the areas of: lesson planning, teacher resources, multi-media in the classroom including e-learning resources for students, the history of the English language, cultural issues for the EFL teacher and professional development. • Demonstrated professional awareness and responsibility as well as teacher development by giving and receiving teaching feedback and working effectively with peers and trainers. He will undoubtedly be an asset to any team, and we confidently recommend h im . TRAINERS Christine Ng Marianne Wood Head IDELT Trainer Assistant IDELT Trainer Bridge-Linguatec Language Services Bridge-Linguatec Language Services Los Leones 439, Providencia Los Leones 439, Providencia Santiago, Chile Santiago, Chile Phone: (56) 2 233-43 56 Phone: (56) 2 233-43 56 Fax: (56) 2 234-13 80 Fax: (56) 2 234-13 80 e-mail: cng@bridgetefl.com web site: www.bridgelinguatec.com/chile web site: www.bridgelinguatec.com/chile © Bridge-Linguatec, Inc.