Record of Observation/ Review of Teaching Practice 1 Peer Observation (Ian Holmes as Observee)

  

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 

Size of student group: est: 3-5 (possibly more) Register includes 21 students from course.  

Observer: Maria Thelin 

Observee: Ian Holmes 

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action. 

Part One 
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review: 

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum? 

This session is the second part of a speaking/ seminar skills series. Last term we focused mainly on research and writing, for the remainder of block 1 the focus is on speaking – along with tutorials to review written assignment: Fashion Marketing Report. Here is a link to the Padlet which contains all the materials we have covered so far, this academic year: 

https://artslondon.padlet.org/iholmes9/bsc_msc-strategic-fashion-management_yr-1-8p1rv65ed0dgiive

This Padlet also contains the activities materials for today’s session – following the class I will add the main slides. This platform is accessible to students via their main course Moodle page.  

Here are the materials activities for the session:  

https://artslondon.padlet.org/iholmes9/seminar-skills-2_marketing-management-joq0qfpzp7ehgzsk

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity? 

I have been working with this group specifically since November 2024 as Language Development Tutor. However, during October I lead the Language Development element in the ‘Into to Fashion Business’ course, which was a large cluster of a number of BA/BSc courses in the Fashion Business School, of which this current course was a part of.  

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes? 

• MAIN AIMS 

• Learners acquire/revise lexical items for managing seminar discourse – agreeing/ disagreeing. 

• Learners to improve confidence in talking about the issues relating to their practice. 

• Learners to improve ability at managing conversation/ seminar discussion. 

• SUB AIMS  

• Learners gain greater awareness of cultural differences which affect communication 

• Learner’s practice asking critical questions of source material 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)? 

Engage in conversation (1:1) – producing target language: agreeing and disagreeing  

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern? 

• Attendance – non-compulsory course – means the majority of cohort will usually not attend (actual numbers are difficult to estimate + the composite of attendees re language groups and abilities)  

• Active participation – Some students may lack confidence/ some students will be more introvert others more extrovert (also see below)  

• Ability range – L1 speakers – and competent L2 speakers and less competent/confident L2 speakers of English – creates possibility for dominance L1 and anxiety/ reluctance to participate L1. (L= Language)  

How will students be informed of the observation/review? 

The students were informed in the previous week’s lesson – they will also receive notice via Moodle announcement – email as part of my communication with them re content and materials ahead of the lesson.  

What would you particularly like feedback on? 

• Students’ interaction/ engagement with the tasks and each other  

• Production of target language in scaffolded tasks (pair work) and open discussion (whole/small groups).  

How will feedback be exchanged? 

Via email (form)  

Verbal – following Observation (TBA)  

Part Three- Observation feedback  

Architecture and delivery 

Your delivery is clear, engaging and relaxed. But at the back of the room there is a noisy fan, which made it difficult to hear you. Closer to the students I could hear well, and you made sure all students gathered at the front. But if you have a bigger group of L2 students, you might want to consider speaking up slightly more. 

The small group of students sat in the front row of tables. When a student arrived late, you made sure that they sat next to the others and could join in the discussion straight away. For a discussion exercise you moved the tables, creating a square so the students could face each other. Maybe you could try this layout from the beginning of the class?  

Students can look at the presentation on their own devices as well as on the big screen. You helped them find the right resources and checked that it worked. Despite this, one of the students got distracted by a glitch during the first task, and I think some personal notifications. You also offer the students paper and pens to take notes, and most opt for this. Maybe you could try a session without personal devices? 

Achieved goals 

You explained new vocabulary, and the students also helped each other find the right words. You put common terms before academic ones in you presentation, e.g. body language (kinesics), making it more approachable. You wrote down vocabulary on a paper pad and a white board. I like how these stayed up during the session, as opposed to notes on a slide which quickly gets replaced. 

You greeted the students as they entered the room, asking how they were and creating a relaxed and safe setting from the start. When you gave the students a question or task you allowed them time to reflect and find the right words without interruption. You noticed if a student didn’t engage in the task or the discussions, and gently encouraged them to contribute, which they did. 

In the open discussion, the L1 students were first to speak, but the L2 students were paying close attention and soon joined in. The L2 students brought their cultural perspectives, and experiences of the global fashion market into the discussion. The conversation grew organically, everyone participated, and it is clear that they had grown in confidence and conversational ability thanks to your tasks. 

Summary 

Your session was clearly structured and the students achieved the aims that you had set out. It is a shame that your sessions are not compulsory. I know they would greatly help my students to complete the work for their compulsory units. Having visited your class, I will encourage them to attend with a new enthusiasm. 

Part Three 

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged: 

Thank you, Maria, for the useful feedback on the lesson. 

Architecture and delivery 

I agree that the volume of delivery on my part would need to be louder for a bigger group – especially in competition with the air conditioning system in that particular room. I anticipated that the number of students would be 3- 5 (however – it is always an unknown).  

The arrangement of the furniture would have been better early on as you have suggested. My rationale for leaving the tables arranged in a line was because a lot of the work at the beginning was plenary, and I wanted the group to focus on the presentation. However, in retrospect I feel that it could have worked better, as per your suggestion, by having smaller tables for pair work – where the students could face each other and then bring the tables together for the whole group discussion.   

I think that the overreliance on personal devices in terms of my classroom activities is certainly an issue for reflection. The use of Padlet – to share the activities – which mirror the presentation slides – has become a staple format for delivery. This in part has been driven by an attempt to make my lessons paperless from an ecological perspective – in terms of the resources; I am trying consciously to avoid wasting paper. It is also through my assumptions about the learners and how I perceive their preference for working- i.e. in the digital space. However, this then does require students to be able to access and use the platform – and there is always the possibility that technical problems will arise which then create barriers to the learners engaging with the tasks. Where possible I do try to give students alternatives – like using pen and paper. This will usually need to be supplied as students will not have pens or paper. I think I need to try to resource more ‘scrap paper’ ahead of sessions (and pens) so that I can offer alternative ways of engaging with the tasks.  

On reflection – in terms of getting to understand the needs and preferences of learners, it might even be worth me surveying them regarding this. I feel like there are benefits to using Padlet as a way of delivering activities – but it does also present barriers. The other issue that you picked up on was the student then becoming distracted by personal messages – this also happened several times with other students – even with devices that they weren’t using to do the tasks – i.e. smart phones. This is an issue which I observe across all my teaching experiences – but honestly, I really don’t know how I should deal with it – rather than take the devices from them – which is something I do not feel comfortable doing. I point for further reflection and research, I think – both from literature and peers.  

Achieved goals 

I always try to make use of the whiteboard (where available) for highlighting vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation items – that come up during the class. Reflecting on your comment- that you liked that the board work stayed visible for the duration of the lesson, this is something that I will make a conscious effort to do more of in future. I think there is value in having the ad hoc language items visible for reference for the whole duration of session (after they have been written), as these points of learning reflect the emergent language in the room, as well the scaffolding that can help learners to communicate their ideas more effectively (especially in speaking focused lessons such as this one).  

Encouraging students to participate is always a tricky balancing act – with regards to students’ levels of confidence – preferences for interaction etc., however, I’m glad that, in this instance, I encouraged this learner to engage – as she was able to produce cogent language and make a valid contribution to the discussion. An aim of the lesson was to build confidence through participation, and it is my belief that through having the (encouraged) opportunity to participate, that this student will be more confident about doing this in future discussions – e.g. the seminar sessions in their main course – BA (Hons) Fashion Management.  

I was also happy with the level of engagement between the L1 and L2 students, the exchange of cultural knowledge and increased cultural awareness was a sub aim of the session – but one which I think has a greater value beyond this session and the language Development programme. This is a strategy which I will adapt for other courses that I teach in the Fashion Business School at LCF. It was very useful to have an external observation of the interactions between participants in this session.  

Summary 

My core approach with Language Development is to provide learners with the skills and strategies with which they can successfully apply to the compulsory and assessed elements of their course. I agree that it is unfortunate that the sessions are not compulsory – as this reflects the attendance, however, this is beyond my control (and as a non-credit bearing course it would seem unlikely that Language Development would been given that status. However, what is within my control is the (strategic) marketing of what I can offer, determining when the best time is to address certain foci, e.g. skills – writing – reading – speaking and listening – for the students during the term/block – communicating to students in their main course sessions  (where possible) the value of these sessions, and communicating and collaborating with course leaders as best I can.