Today Alli taught in Mr. I’s World Geography class. She did a really good job leading a review game for the students who are about to take a test on the Middle East. It was especially good considering that Alli is not usually in Mr. I’s geography class. After the game the winning side received their candy (the side that lost seemed to end up with candy as well =); then the students began working on their study guide.
The one thing I really liked today was that Mr. I divided the class into buddies to go over the study guide. This was good because it forced the students to get out of their comfort zones and work with people they may not usually work with and in turn give the guide more attention than usual. It was even more interesting because the topic they were studying was the Middle East and in turn the religions of the Middle East. Religion is always a controversial topic, but this was my first real glimpse of discussing religion and peoples differing beliefs in the classroom. I got into a discussion with one of my fellow interns about the bible as an historical book. I love to argue the opposite side of whatever a person is saying. . .probably just to get a reaction, but it was interesting for me because the topic produced such passion. The students were even involved and it was interesting to see the different view points.
In reflection, I see that I will have to really think about what the best format will be for discussing controversial topics in my future classroom. I want healthy dialogue, but I do not want people leaving feeling misunderstood or resentful.
2 responses so far ↓
ja1225block // March 19, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Good post, I really like how Mr. I made the groups with people who did not know each other to avoid off task behavior. I’m also glad to hear that Alli did so well.
professornick // March 21, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Good description of your colleague’s teaching AND of Mr. I’s grouping students for review. It would be interesting to know what Mr. I’s thinking was in choosing up partners. Do you think he was matching stronger/more knowledgeable students with somewhat weaker/less knowledgeable ones? Was he looking for different perspectives to be expressed in these pairings? In your analysis, you should consider the grouping practices you observed and analyze them from what you’ve learned from ProfB and ProfElZ who both talked about cooperative learning groups, especially with students who are special needs learners.
Good work!
ProfN