Observation # 2: Characteristics of Teacher Behavior

Characteristics of Teacher Behavior

From what I have observed, Mr. Cushman’s College prep class seems to be managed quite well. Disruptions are met with respect and professionalism. I have yet to see Mr. Cushman get dragged into a student conflict. Everything is handled briefly and efficiently.

1. While investigations are being conducted, is the teacher a fellow investigator?

I have personally been in classes where this sort of thing happens. The teacher takes fifteen minutes to explain a procedure, then sits for forty at their desk grading papers or messing around on their laptop. It seems more prevalent in lab periods, or inquiry type lessons. If the teacher is not a fellow investigator, it is my experience that students view unguided research time as a time to talk to friends and text.

Thankfully, Mr. Cushman did not employ this hands off strategy. He assigned a somewhat vague problem, but was extremely active in going from group to group and increasing student engagement. He didn't just go over and give the answer either, but instead prompted the students to access prior knowledge to come up with a solution.

2. Does the teacher act as a classroom secretary when data needs to be organized for class analysis?

During the lesson, Mr. Cushman went over the homework from the previous night. The students were supposed to copy down Dalton's postulates, and then use them to answer a couple questions from the text. As the postulates were given, Mr. Cushman organized them by placing them on the white board at the front of the room. If students were struggling with the extension questions, he would reference the clearly presented postulates and prompt the correct response.

3. Are new terms introduced only after students have had sufficient direct experience with materials, events, or situations that enable them to comprehend the verbal presentation?

In the case of introducing Dalton's postulates, I can't really say as I wasn't there for the introductary lesson. it seemed however that a portion of the students understood the material. This was demonstrated through answering of convergent questions posed to the class. At the same time though, the students seemed to struggle on a pretty dense class assignment dealing with the material.

It almost seemed as if the basic foundations were sound, but there needed to be a little more instruction before leaping to the assignment.

4. Does the teacher provide additional materials, experiences, or events that enlarge, refine and reinforce the meaning of the previously introduced terms?

In addition to the maintaing an atmosphere of professionalism and respect, Mr. Cushman also excels at relating his material to situations relevant to teenagers. In explaining the conservation of mass, he explained how there is the possibility of the elements that made up Einstein's brain being present in any given student's brain.

Following Dalton's Postulates, Mr. Cushman introduced the mass and charge of the electron. He related the idea of cathode rays, and exlpained how they were found in the computer monitors at the back of the room. To illustrate the deflection that showed the low mass of an electron, he used students in the class as an example. He compared the diffculty in deflecting a young female student to deflecting a New England Patriot player. The latter example was great, as Mr. Cushman has several football players in his class.

5. Does the teacher handle interuptions by calmly, separately, and personally addressing the offending student or students?

During my observations, I have yet to see Mr. Cushman have a problem with student behavior. I think the main reaons for this is because he models, once again, respect and professionalism. It seems he also makes a point to involve the students who might potentially be disruptive. He includes them in examples, and deals with them respectfully before there is an issue.

He mentioned to me privately, that he does not want the kids to fear him. Instead, he wants them to have respect for him. In doing so, he believes that kids will feel they are "letting him down" if they misbehave or underperform. This idea is backed up by a genuine interest, and a level of realness with the students that is admirable. The approach seems to work. The only time I saw any sort of employ of class management was when several students were talking in the back of the room. All it took was Mr. Cushman saying, "Excuse me, Diana is talking." and the students became quiet.

6. Does the teacher appear confident, calm and friendly?

Mr. Cushman seems stern, but understanding. He has the air of someone who could be a hardass, but never has to prove it. Instead he is very outgoing with the students, and takes efforts to know them on a personal level. I have personally witnessed some professors who are sickly sweet and seem extremly fake. Mr. Cushman is not one of these teachers. It seems like the students respect him, and he reciprocates.

In addition, his grasp of content seems very strong.

Observation #1: Characteristics of Effective Communication

Characteristics of Effective Communication

My first official observation was with Mr. Richard Cushman. I sat in on both his 3^rd and 4^th period general Chemistry classes. My goal during these sessions was to analyze Mr. Cushman’s communication techniques.

1. Does the teacher pose most questions in a divergent or evaluative form?

The majority of Mr. Cushman’s questions were evaluative, as they were referencing a lab the students had completed in the previous class. He employed prompting, in which he would say for example “The liquid boiled and left a white residue. This would identify it as……..what?”.

This method allowed for the students to construct a lab report format. They generated exactly what Mr. Cushman was looking for, but the prompting most likely allowed them to feel ownership for it. This type of evaluative questioning seemed to high light the goals he expected students to reach for his lesson.

He did use a few divergent questions, such as “What do you think the purpose of this lab was?” This may seem evaluative, but he allowed for a number of different answers. Mr. Cushman also asked self-answering questions. I believe this was done to conserve time. Due to the fact that much of the lesson was review of lab procedure, his questions were not very high on Bloom’s taxonomy.

2. If convergent questions are posed, are they formulated to focus attention on particular aspects of an investigation in which the student is having difficulty?

During the review of the lab I would say no. Mr. Cushman was more trying to promote recall as opposed to addressing difficulty. For the second part of the class however, he introduced the idea of significant figures. It was during this period that he asked convergent questions not directly tied to his material, but rather who’s answer helped comprehension overall. For example, he asked how different would a professional athletes salary be if his yard carried statistic was rounded up or down from 4.5.

3. Are the questions phrased directly and simply?

This was a skill I feel Mr. Cushman excelled at. Aside from a few stumbles during his second class, every one of his questions seemed well thought out. He utilized his time perfectly, and didn’t ramble or get side tracked. A personal difficulty I have is coming up with weak questions then confusing the point while attempting to fill in the gaps. Mr. Cushman didn’t show any of this.

There were no “uhs” or “ums”. He was direct, and efficient in asking exactly what he wanted to ask (either that or he has been teaching long enough to make it seem that way).

4. Does a teacher call on an individual after posing the question?

Having read the handout prior to going into the class, I was on the look out for this. When it finally happened, and it only happened once, I really noticed. It seemed Mr. Cushman did it to engage a student who had not been focused on the lesson. It didn’t seem to derail the class as a whole however, as it is perhaps a tactic he rarely employs.

In general, his questions were directed to the class as a whole. While this didn’t lead to a cacophony of replies, it did limit the participation to the few students who knew what was going on. It also allowed students to hesitate and answer a split second after their peers in an attempt to fit in.

5. Are the questions phrased directly and simply?

Mr. Cushman’s wait time was closer to three to four seconds. I noticed though that many times he would answer his own question before students would reply. It seemed he did this to keep the class moving forward.

6. Does the teacher listen to and accept all sincere student answers to valuable contributions?

Once again, this was one of Mr. Cushman’s strengths. He communicated to the students his sincere regard for their answers. He would physically move close to them and commend their efforts. When a student answered incorrectly, he would be brief but respectful. I feel like this is important, as it strikes a balance between holding students accountable and being supportive.

Mr. Cushman’s listening skills were made apparent when he would “parrot” the student’s contribution back to the class. He would include the participants name as well to give them ownership. He didn’t baby his students, and rewarded their efforts with genuine respect rather than affection (“What a wonderful answer!” type stuff). His responses were very professional and not fake.

7. In answering student questions, does the teacher respond by providing additional ideas or information that enable the students to continue their thinking?

Mr. Cushman was able to do this with little hesitation. As I mentioned earlier, he incorporated examples about football when several school athletes posed questions. They were immediately focused and several began to answer further questions, showing that their thinking had been engaged. In his second period, the idea of valuing gold was given during the section on significant figures. Following this real world example, students seemed to understand the material better and were able to answer more abstract examples.

Conclusion

Mr. Cushman demonstrated many good communication techniques in his classroom. His clarity was admirable, as was his ability to encourage student engagement. The underlying tone of respect in the room allowed for communication to be professional. While I was there, I didn’t see him have any classroom management issues despite his open questioning tactic. My only criticism, and it is very offset by his many positive techniques, is that he often answered his own questions before students had an opportunity. Once again though, I don’t believe this has to do with lack of teaching skills as much as it does with needing to cram 120minutes of material into a 50-minute period.