Our team micro teaching project went well. Mina and Sam were excellent teaching partners and it was a well planned lesson (we are thankful to Sam for all his hard work). We combined three basic portions: Mina gave an introduction, Sam furthered this with a proof and further explanation and I used bouncing tennis balls to show a real world example. I believe most of our 'students' enjoyed the presentation and were able to follow the reasoning (see feedback to follow). Our weakest element was our use of time. We went longer than we had planned to and so felt rushed. It was great experience, though, and has given us good exerience teaching this subject in front of math students.
Averages on Feedback
Clarity
Structure was clear - 4.14
Verbal & Visual were clear - 4.07
Math ideas were clear - 4.14
Active Learning
I was engaged in learning - 3.57
A variety of activities offered - 3.64
Instructors showed engagement was valued - 3.93
Offered activities connected to other math areas - 3.93
Connected to other areas of life and culture - 3.43
Some comments included: good classroom management, very engaging, clear instructions, good humour, clear review, concise, fun activity,good easy examples, it's good to have a real life problem at the end, very well organized.
Also, on the not so positive: bit much time in review, short on time, the board was blocked (couldn't see), wait for students to respond, little long and drawn out, the pace is too fast, needed examples of geometric series at first, define terms clearly, relax when speaking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment