Observation

Abstract In visiting an elementary school general education, this is an analysis of their principles of practicing literacy instruction through lesson plans and implementation. Some of the observation criteria fall under communication, being a constructivist, understanding to activate prior knowledge, interaction and concluding with a review and an assessment of some kind. Teacher should work to increase students’ motivation on learning and use systematic instruction throughout the lesson plan. After an observation description, linking the strengths, weaknesses or improvements that should be made, a personal reflection of implementation is shared addressing how the environment was used, how could it have been altered to support more opportunities for learning and what was surprising during the observation. During the week of February 11th, 2013, I was given the opportunity to observe Ms. Houzvicka’s first grade class at Juan Cabrillo Elementary in Hawthorne, CA. For one day, I observed her classroom for the entire day, giving breaks for lunch, recess and snack. The total period of observation was between four to five hours. The scheduling and dynamics of Cabrillo Elementary in the last few years has shown to be incredibly special. Ms. Houzvicka explained to me that the Wiseburn District has pushed forth a plan called the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) that focuses on actions to raise the academic performance of all students to the levels of performance goals of the California Academic Performance Index (API). As a result of the SPSA, at the beginning of each year, the student’s prior and future teachers spend time to decide whether the student meets the baseline requirement, determining if a student requires more time with the teacher; this sets them in a bracket of “early bird” or “late bird”. It is implemented so that students will receive the support that they require. It allows for Language Arts instruction to be conducted in smaller groups with the teacher and provides an opportunity for students with difficulties to take part in resource specialist programs without missing out on their regular day-to-day instruction.
Cabrillo Elementary serves pre kindergarten through second graders. On a regular day, there are many different times set for the students. Under the kindergarten schedule, there are the “tedde” kindergarten (TK) “early bird” and “late bird” students but also the kindergarten “early bird” and “late bird” students. TK students are the students who just miss the cutoff age for kindergarten. In essence, TK students will experience kindergarten in the span of two years, first to focus on social or motor development and then in the second year, to focus on academic and learning skills. First and second graders are also on the “early bird” and “late bird” schedules for the same reasons. Each student is individually assessed at the beginning of the school year. For example, for kindergarteners, students were evaluated if whether they can recognize their letters, sounds and numbers. From the baseline of entering into the year, there is a recorded sheet of their basic skills. After each trimester, more information is documented. After the assessment of each student is made, the teachers and resource specialists work together to determine which of the programs that the student will attend. At Cabrillo Elementary, there are several programs to address the different needs of the students. The English Learners Development (ELD) and Reading Intervention programs allow for students to have an extended day focusing primarily on Language Arts or reading. The Individually Designed Arts Program (IDAP) focuses on dance instruction to teach and assist students in coordination and rhythm, which is believed to be necessary for reading and math. The IDAP also includes a section of vocal music for specifically second graders to teach and improve reading fluency. With programs like these, the support of the unique scheduling and by observing two classes at Cabrillo Elementary, it offers an environment that supports English Learners in several ways.
Beginning the observation of Ms. Houzvicka’s classroom, the atmosphere seemed routine but fun, interesting and challenging. The students were excited and delighted to be in the class. Each of them set their backpack outside of the classroom, entered and sat quietly on the group rug. Once they all arrived to the group rug, they were encouraged to engage with Ms. Houzvicka in a sing-along song, The Farmer in the Dell. Modeling for the students to sing along, the song would go through three rounds to encourage and give each of the students a chance to join along, if they wanted. It reminded me of a previous textbook that I read where Serdyukov and Hill (2009, p. 59) stated that the interactive process in a setting is what brings learners and speakers together. A critique of Ms. Houzvicka’s sing along opening activity to warm the students up to the day would be that instead of it, the possibly of using something with more social interaction would have better fit the agenda. The use of social interaction often bridges students, moving from the unknown to the known and offers an opportunity to connect to each other, making material relevant to themselves and language. However, with the lessons ahead, this part of the day makes sense because she is introducing different forms of reading to her students. By introducing this activity in the beginning of her day, it seems that she understands that students learn when they hear, read and when they are given the opportunity to be hands on about literacy.
After group rug time, a set of three lessons focusing on skills that the students needed to improve upon were presented and reviewed. The activities allowed for connection between the word and an image, further and deeper comprehension, and encouraged self-expression. For example in one lesson, she encouraged the students to use their imagination and draw the image of a word. For instance, for the word, “pan”, the students needed to draw what they thought a “pan” would look like. In this lesson, she connects their prior knowledge to the word that they are imagining. By introducing the word and actively asking the students to draw it, the new word becomes meaningful through personalization.
In another lesson, while reading over a small booklet with simple words and ideas, she encouraged the students to connect ideas together, allowing for a deeper comprehension of the sentence. So while the sentence said, “Billy runs.” She would ask, “Who is Billy? Is it the butterfly? The snail or the fox?” The students would conceptualize that it is the fox because a butterfly cannot run, it flies and a snail does not run but it is slow. Ms. Houzvicka engaged with the students with questions that would allow for independent thinking and connections. Her goal shined through that with reading, the students should read things in their entirety to make a conclusion.
In a final lesson, she had, “read, stamp, trace and write” words. The step-by-step process of this was to allow the students to look at the word, break down the word by letters, stamp, then trace the word and repeat. In each of the three lessons that were covered, there was a strong demonstration of modeling. She gave examples of work, the process, and a final example of the work, giving standards of what she expected. She also activated their prior knowledge on what was not finished from the previous day, helped the students make connections and showed how the material became relevant. Here, she made it possible for students to become hands on about their reading, literacy and language.
It showed that through these three activities, the students understood the directions. More importantly, Ms. Houzvicka was emphasizing language as a tool to communication with the help of metacognitive development. By creating a discussion environment, she would ask questions; let the students reflect before answering for them and allow them to work in pairs if it meant that they were collaboratively learning together. She also made sure that in her delivery of lessons, it was using sheltered English, where her level of speech was natural but slow enough to understand; she kept her sentences short, clearly enunciated, simple, controlled and checked with the class for their understanding. Each lesson and instruction, Ms. Houzvicka used enthusiastic body language, facial expressions, gestures, assistance and encouragement. The interaction seemed positive, endearing and motivational while providing a time for the students to show their high order and critical thinking skills. At the end of the day, she reviewed with her students, letting them talk about what they read, write and what was interesting for the day. To finalize the day, Ms. Houzvicka applauses the students for using their critical thinking and pushing forth a great effort in their lessons.
The environment of Ms. Houzvicka’s class was organized, with her table in one corner, a wall with a few computers and tables in rectangular shapes to accommodate the students. On the walls, they were covered with many visuals of words, pictures, alphabets and graphics of the weather, presidents to rules of the classroom. On the board, before starting, she had a timeline of the day ahead, what they were going to do and when recess was or lunch. It was a thoughtful consideration of how to clue the students into their responsibilities and agenda. Most of the surroundings in this class were thoughtful and supportive of learning literacy and reading. Not much of the surroundings could have been altered unless there were more resources. The one addition that could have benefited the students is by providing more computers for the students who are high achieving. With only four computers in the room, it restricts the amount of students that are able to use them after finishing their class work. If there were more resources and software that incorporates more than one student at a computer, it could further support the learning of literacy.
Ms. Houzvicka’s lesson plans fit the generic plan however, with time management, she was able to fit more information in the individual lesson plans to keep students occupied after one activity was finished. The assessment and learning outcomes may not be fit and clear cut rubric but their evaluation fits a performance or authentic assessment. Rather than grading their answers, because all of their answers will be fitting to the material, she focused on the completion of the tasks performed and the skills obtained. This type of assessment is more fitting for elementary students and personally, seems more fitting for any educational setting. The pressures of standardized tests, formative or summative assessments seem to defer from the joy of learning and retaining knowledge. When it comes to assessing how I could possibly teach each of these classes differently, it is difficult to improve lessons that are working. With the results of the API numbers rising over the last years, the lessons implemented show students are learning, understanding, building confidence and volunteering in class. The only possible alteration that I would suggest for the school is to allow for more class time with the teachers. I feel that while these lessons are showing improvement in the students’ scores, the addition of more creative, hands on, art activities would enhance their interest in language. Arts and crafts can contribute greatly to a student’s interaction with a lesson. For instance, a lesson plan could include drawing a picture of a scene in a book without looking at the illustrations. This addition of an art and the use of imagination would engage and grab a student’s attention because it does not only become personalized but it also becomes fun. However, Cabrillo shows through their implemented plans that the students’ are retaining a positive experience and appreciating their teachers. While students are happy, teachers are providing positive instruction and results; there is not much that can be done to instruct differently.
After the observation week, I spoke with Ms. Houzvicka about her own adaption of instruction, how she implements and develops lessons, especially for English Learners. Touching base on my own learning about SDAIE and other methods, Ms. Houzvicka tells me SDAIE is “good teaching” that has enhanced her lesson plans. She admits that half way through the school year, she has seen a positive change in her students. They tend to be more confident and willing to take part in discussions. With results in the API of the school, she is more than confident that the programs are working in the students’ benefit. She says that with the Wiseburn District’s population being a majority of minorities, programs that push the fundamental elements of English, it boosts the confidence in students early on, which she believes, will have a strong positive affect in their future. She shares with me that while she directs her instruction towards English Learners because her class (like much of the school) is filled with minorities with English being a second language at home, Cabrillo’s programs like ELD and Reading Intervention tremendously help with the students’ educational attitude by offering the support and encouragement that they need. To finish our interview like conversation, she tells me that as a future teacher, the tip to stay current in the classroom is to stay in tune with the students. For example, she tells me years ago, instruction in the classroom was not technology based; staying current with technology, resources and what may grab the students’ attention is the most important aspect of being a good teacher.
Cabrillo Elementary seems to be a strong school with teachers and administrators that truly care for the advancement in their API but also their students’ well-beings and futures. Through the observation and interview, it has shined a light on the strengths of implementing SDAIE methods into lesson planning, how to make instruction more personalized for the students but most of all, the attitude of the teacher is what sets the tone of the classroom. In my future as an educator, I hope that I will be able to follow the footsteps of Ms. Houzvicka and other great teachers.

References
Serdyukov, P., & Hill, R. (2009) Methodology for Second Language Development: Revised Education for National University. Boston: Pearson.

References: Serdyukov, P., & Hill, R. (2009) Methodology for Second Language Development: Revised Education for National University. Boston: Pearson.