Teaching Improvement
While there are many ways to improve teaching throughout one's career, in this section I want to focus on some particularly valuable methods of teaching improvement that I have used. The first is the Teaching Circle, which is supported by the College through the Professional Development Center. Involvement in a teaching circle provides faculty with unique opportunities to work collaboratively towards a specific teaching goal. I have had the opportunity to be involved in three teaching circles. The first is the long-running Developmental Writing Teaching Circle, which provided me important contact with and access to senior colleagues and their expertise and was especially important during my early tenure track years in shaping my teaching. The second teaching circle, of which I was the faculty lead, was ESL Grammar. The ESL teaching circle, I believe, has set a high standard for focused discussion and productive outcomes through a more rigorous approach based on the literature pertaining to this type of professional activity. This academic year (2016-2017) I have continued participation in the ESL teaching circle: ESL Listening Teaching Circle and I hope this will be an ongoing source of professional development and teacher improvement and an integral part of professional activity in our department. Again, I have found this to be a very efficient and productive means for faculty to build collegiality, share, and discuss best practices and the latest research.
In connection with the ESL Grammar Teaching Circle, I also want to mention how this collaboration underscores my desire to understand the problems of and potential for teaching grammar to English language learners. By its very nature this teaching circle has been a self-reflective process. As a result I am moving away from more traditional forms of grammar teaching to a more discourse-based approach for a specific context. This is in line with research on the subject. Applying what I was learning while teaching was like changing course in mid-flight; it was exciting, but a little scary. I am happy to say that I was able to observe positive results from my fall 2015 grammar class as I implemented discourse-based strategies during the semester. Firstly, I can report a qualitative difference in the level of student participation and engagement. On the one hand, the traditional method of sentence level analysis and "fill-in-the-blank" book work typically resulted in non-contextualized rote learning and limited student interest and engagement. On the other hand, when, for example, I introduced newspapers and magazines in a group context for students to find and explain grammar structures, e.g., passive voice, the results were much more positive: students discussed the grammar choices with each other, asked clarifying questions, and produced their own examples. In terms of quantifying the results of introducing a new teaching method this proved more challenging for a number of reasons mostly to do with how the class was originally structured, i.e., tests were based on sentence-level questions. The tests themselves produced little variation in results (see Test 1 and Test 6). What was perhaps more revealing was the noted improvement in language production through speaking and writing, which was directly associated with discourse-based activities. For example, in one activity students chose from a list of topics, drafted and revised essays, and gave an oral presentation. Here is an example of part of a student's final draft of Essay 1 at the beginning the semester and her final Essay 2 draft towards the middle of the semester. While this analysis is incomplete I am confident that discourse-based approaches to grammar instruction is the way forward.
This academic year (2016-2017) my focus is on improving teaching listening and in a similar way to grammar I look forward to putting into practice what I am learning from the teaching circle and trying to measure results.
Another method for improving my teaching that I have found effective is observation and reflection of peers' teaching. Specifically, I made the goal in the spring of 2016 to "shadow" my colleagues Nathan Cole and Carol Sieverts in their English 1010 classes. This was an important strategy for me since English 1010 represented a course outside my usual fields of ESL and developmental literacy. I recorded my reflections of class observations in the following journal.
Although I have listed the next item in the service category, I wanted to briefly mention here my participation in program assessment. The ESL program is undergoing an accreditation process and I am on the sub-committee responsible for curriculum, faculty, length and structure of program of study, and student achievement. Working through this process has brought ESL faculty together and is moving us towards an overall improved ESL program. I am excited to be part of this important work that will ultimately benefit our students.
Finally, I wanted to mention my awareness of the College's focus on high impact practices in teaching. I will mention service learning as an area that I have had some experience with during my tenure track period and an example of high impact practices. I successfully applied to designate my Writing 0990 courses as service learning courses. There was some risk in this endeavor, especially because it involved a developmental class (where students often have difficulty managing a regular course); however, I believe it provided many students with enhanced learning opportunities particularly in their reflective writing where they reported on their service activities during the semester. During that period I was able to build a strong partnership with the ESL Lab (which acted as the service learner partner) and saw first-hand how my Writing students and ESL students benefited from interacting with each other. I am currently considering how service learning could be adapted to ESL courses.
In connection with the ESL Grammar Teaching Circle, I also want to mention how this collaboration underscores my desire to understand the problems of and potential for teaching grammar to English language learners. By its very nature this teaching circle has been a self-reflective process. As a result I am moving away from more traditional forms of grammar teaching to a more discourse-based approach for a specific context. This is in line with research on the subject. Applying what I was learning while teaching was like changing course in mid-flight; it was exciting, but a little scary. I am happy to say that I was able to observe positive results from my fall 2015 grammar class as I implemented discourse-based strategies during the semester. Firstly, I can report a qualitative difference in the level of student participation and engagement. On the one hand, the traditional method of sentence level analysis and "fill-in-the-blank" book work typically resulted in non-contextualized rote learning and limited student interest and engagement. On the other hand, when, for example, I introduced newspapers and magazines in a group context for students to find and explain grammar structures, e.g., passive voice, the results were much more positive: students discussed the grammar choices with each other, asked clarifying questions, and produced their own examples. In terms of quantifying the results of introducing a new teaching method this proved more challenging for a number of reasons mostly to do with how the class was originally structured, i.e., tests were based on sentence-level questions. The tests themselves produced little variation in results (see Test 1 and Test 6). What was perhaps more revealing was the noted improvement in language production through speaking and writing, which was directly associated with discourse-based activities. For example, in one activity students chose from a list of topics, drafted and revised essays, and gave an oral presentation. Here is an example of part of a student's final draft of Essay 1 at the beginning the semester and her final Essay 2 draft towards the middle of the semester. While this analysis is incomplete I am confident that discourse-based approaches to grammar instruction is the way forward.
This academic year (2016-2017) my focus is on improving teaching listening and in a similar way to grammar I look forward to putting into practice what I am learning from the teaching circle and trying to measure results.
Another method for improving my teaching that I have found effective is observation and reflection of peers' teaching. Specifically, I made the goal in the spring of 2016 to "shadow" my colleagues Nathan Cole and Carol Sieverts in their English 1010 classes. This was an important strategy for me since English 1010 represented a course outside my usual fields of ESL and developmental literacy. I recorded my reflections of class observations in the following journal.
Although I have listed the next item in the service category, I wanted to briefly mention here my participation in program assessment. The ESL program is undergoing an accreditation process and I am on the sub-committee responsible for curriculum, faculty, length and structure of program of study, and student achievement. Working through this process has brought ESL faculty together and is moving us towards an overall improved ESL program. I am excited to be part of this important work that will ultimately benefit our students.
Finally, I wanted to mention my awareness of the College's focus on high impact practices in teaching. I will mention service learning as an area that I have had some experience with during my tenure track period and an example of high impact practices. I successfully applied to designate my Writing 0990 courses as service learning courses. There was some risk in this endeavor, especially because it involved a developmental class (where students often have difficulty managing a regular course); however, I believe it provided many students with enhanced learning opportunities particularly in their reflective writing where they reported on their service activities during the semester. During that period I was able to build a strong partnership with the ESL Lab (which acted as the service learner partner) and saw first-hand how my Writing students and ESL students benefited from interacting with each other. I am currently considering how service learning could be adapted to ESL courses.