Qualitative feedback

In addition to the quantitative grades that the mentor gave with the lesson observations, as summarised above, the mentor also provided qualitative comments for each of the lesson observation areas observed (table 22 below). The table shows the individual areas observed in the left hand column and comments summarised for each day against each individual area. Where there is a blank in table 22, the mentor had not commented on that aspect for that lesson on that day. The table appears to represent the mentor’s observations of the student teacher’s growing understanding of children’s learning as she progresses through her ZPD over the week, scaffolded by the dialogue with the mentor as recorded as observations of teaching. In the summary here, wording has been altered slightly for clarity of expression only. Example raw data can be found in appendix K.

Table 22 Data from mentor's observation feedback - qualitative

Lesson Observation Category

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5

Progress and challenge

Written resources good

Allowed for self- differentiation

Effective differentiation All challenged

Star system for self challenge Envelopes with personal challenges in Subject knowledge

Showed key vocab Powerpoint used helped to reinforce subject knowledge Secure understanding of the topic Different approaches Range of techniques. Diamond 9 and debate to show understanding

Debate, media style work and discussion Time to write ideas

Planning Recapped previous

lesson

Plan showed this clearly

Resources including other adults

Introduced new card voting system Excellent use of ICT

Very good range of resources including ICT Resources given to children were excellent Envelopes already provided for the task

Engagement High level

engagement in starter

Too long at the start

All engaged. All able to access at own level

All children totally engaged

All children able to and interested in and giving opinions

Talk for learning Opportunities for children to discuss in 2s and 3s Focus group thinking explained by focus group – impact of focus group Focus group member in each talk group helped meaningful

discussion

Behaviour management

Behaviour was good Range of strategies Children know and respond Fussier children Used usual techniques Resources caused an issue – have them prepared in envelopes Time constraints Flexibility and adaptability

Very good. Opening of lesson used to assess

understanding

Lesson based on feedback from focus group

Showed

understanding of how children want to learn

Method of learning changed after focus group

Modified from input

Based on focus group N/A Assessment for learning Feedback from children in discussion Feedback is good. Children all know targets and able to work with this information Individual needs Feedback allowed assessment of needs met Planning and strategies in place to allow all children to be stretched

All children could learn facilitated by member of focus group

Mixed ability groups using focus group members as leads and to support less able to contribute Social and cultural understanding Lesson allowed children to understand the concept of fair-trade Lots of questions between children Children looking at lives/situations/famili es in fair trade All children understood how/why fair-trade works

Strengths Excellent range of resources

Allows children to give point of view but wants thinking behind it

Teaching sequence good and made sense

Areas for

development

Time for tasks How can you ensure

less able children can access the lesson?

The mentor’s observations focussed the feedback on observed teaching practices rather than deepening pedagogical knowledge. One interesting point to note is that the mentor’s feedback in some aspects reflects that of the children. For example, on day one, in the area of engagement, both children and mentor comment on the student teacher spending too long at the start, but on day four, the children and mentor comment that the children were actively engaged. This may indicate that the feedback from the MKOs (children and mentors) had developed the understanding of the student teacher about children’s learning and her practice has changed as a result. However, the process of observation was more generally focused towards the attainment of the Standards and the qualification of QTS. This is evidenced through the qualitative comments made by the mentor, for example behaviour was good, resources prepared ahead of the session (table 22, days two, three and five). The requirements of the PGCE course state that these observations were to be supported with oral feedback, and therefore these may only represent the ‘minutes’ of an observation and meeting between student teacher and mentor. However, there was no indication that the feedback deepened the understanding of the process of learning and teaching but rather supplied evidence towards a competence model of teacher training. This process however can be useful when used in conjunction with other reflective models where the student teacher reflects on the children’s learning and his/her own practice, and emphasises the intra- and interpersonal relationships in the classroom (Moore, 2007). These data therefore should not be considered alone, but in conjunction with the powerful data elicited from the children in discussion about their learning and from the student teacher’s reflections of the process. However, the mentor could also be seen here as the MKO of the student teacher brokering the way for the student teacher to join the current teaching community of practice which is focussed towards the competence model at all levels of education.