1. I want to begin with question 3: what it was like working in my group.

I’ve worked on another class presentation with Regina and have found her easy to work with: cooperative and willing. I haven’t worked with Tatiana before, but had befriended her back in the beginning of our MAT days when she was terribly homesick, so she seems comfortable with me. Though she is very quiet, I know her to be bright, educated,experienced and full of ideas. I was lucky to be assigned this group

The hardest part for me in working with any group is the process of finding roles. While I like it to happen naturally, I always want to make sure that I am neither ignored nor dominant. The dynamics of this group unfolded organically. When I’m with quiet people I’m afraid of coming across as too pushy. I’m not pushy by nature, but I do have limited patience for circular discussions and inertia. However, that wasn’t a problem for us.

Initially I saw my primary role as overseer, making sure each person’s ideas were heard. Tatiana, who has more experience in teaching than either Regina or me, would toss out an idea and then withdraw it. I’d fish it back so we could, as a group, examine it. More often than not, it stayed in. We did that with Regina’s ideas too, though she seemed less attached to her ideas than Tatiana. I was delighted to see how stubborn (though shy) Tatiana really is. I let many of my ideas fall by the wayside when I heard better ones, but  advocated for them if I still thought they were good.

I’m still a little worried that Regina felt less part of this phase than us other two. She didn’t have much to add, though she was always willing and good-natured, and I didn’t know if her silence was reticence or agreement.

I really enjoyed this phase, because I learned a lot about how the others think, I practiced letting go of control (I’ve been an independent producer for 30 years), and gained insight into the topic and pedagogical methodology. Both T & R had a commitment to the task and a willingness to pull their share. Regina is less of a self-starter than us other two, so that’s why I sometimes felt pushy. She was willing to take direction, which it felt unnatural to give.

Because I’m probably the most outgoing of the three (even though I’m highly antisocial in Real Life) I think I became the leader. But I was an inclusive and flexible one. The others seemed happy with this arrangement. We even discussed it: “Do you want to direct this part?” but no one did. Maybe it was my age that plunked me here.

2. What I learned about teaching/learning from co-creating the lesson.

This wasn’t news to me, but it reinforced a long-held belief: multiple minds working cooperatively are far more powerful and exciting than when we chug away solo. It’s hard, sometimes, to listen to others when I think I have a really great idea, but years of experience have taught me what I stand to gain if I let go of preconceived ideas.

Regina brought an interest in Internet research and some fresh ideas she gleaned from there. Tatiana, whose mind is linear, lent us her academic chops. The three of us together had fun brainstorming ideas for exercises: certainly the most enjoyable phase. With my background as an artist and radio producer, I was good at developing the overall structure and slapping some imagination in there. So I guess you could say that I learned that a variety of backgrounds and ways of thinking are ideal when co-creating a lesson.

I know that a dominant personality can squash that delicate balance and, to my mind, that never happened with us. I even checked along with way with my colleagues to make sure they felt everything was moving along equitably.

Tatiana, who is analytical in comparison to my artsy style, taught me a lot about the deeper thinking that drives a lesson plan: almost religious adherence to a particular teaching framework and set of objectives. She kept bringing us back to the approach we’d agreed upon for this lesson: Present, Practice, Produce. “That’s not really production,” she’d point out. “It’s practice.” So she got us looking much more deeply at the framework we were trying to build on. Regina, less secure in the field of teaching, was happy to do any tasks that we assigned her and was less willing to volunteer for any.

Team teaching is a powerful tool when there is equity and mutual respect within the group. And it’s even more productive — and downright exciting — when members bring differing perspectives, along with equal dedication to doing the work. Seeing the sparks of imagination fly will always be a highlight. Any idea in isolation might flicker, but when passed from brain to brain it flares.

3. What I learned from the feedback.

I was surprised that our students hadn’t been bored. I mean, we’d designed the lesson to be interesting and varied, but our audience appeared subdued and less engaged than usual. I was relieved to find they found value in the lesson.

The comment that we were moving at a fast clip was useful, though not surprising given our time frame. It’s important, for teaching in the real world, to chunk lessons into manageable bits. We had too much for the amount of time we had.

Someone’s comment that they needed more context and maybe an example before we began an exercise was useful.

Alex said it’s a good idea to alert people to what will follow in the lesson, something I learned in part from his teaching, because I like knowing the overall structure in advance.

Alex’s point that we would have done well to choose frequently encountered forms of connected speech rather than those chose was an excellent one. I think we picked ours because, in the short time we had, they were the only ones for which we found enough background to present them with some competence. But I agree it would have been more useful to describe high-frequency forms.

Kim’s question about how people work together equitably in groups aroused mixed feelings in me. Though she never intended the question to be pointed directly at anyone, she later told me it came to her mind during our presentation. In fact, as we presented, I was afraid I was dominating the floor. What may or may not have been apparent to onlookers was my regular return to the sidelines to see if someone else wanted to talk. We’d had a rough script of who would talk when, but we departed from it in the moment. Tatiana hadn’t wanted to talk at all because she’s still really sick and has a fever, plus she’d forgotten her glasses today and her vision is very poor. I’d go to her and say “Do you want to take this part now?” and she, not surprisingly, would say “no.” I think I might have stepped on Regina’s toes a little (though, during the presentation, she assured me I wasn’t). I was feeling a little frustrated because I knew the material a little better, having done a lot of the research and put the PowerPoint together. I admit that there was one time she had a turn and delivered incomplete information that affected the next step, so I chimed in with an addition. Since it is a group presentation, it’s hard to step back and watch something essential omitted. I thought it served the message better if I added it, even at the risk of appearing to be a controlling butthead.

I do know that what goes on in front of the classroom is just a small part of the overall “team teaching” process. It can be like a play, with actor, director and playwright among the crucial roles. I felt that Tatiana was the powerhouse brain behind the process, Regina I liken to the costume designer and gopher and provider of cheer. Maybe I was the producer, pulling pieces together with oversight. If it had been different people (as it was for our SLA presentation) the roles would have shifted.

For my own edification I want to “debrief” with my team and see what they wish had gone differently, and if there were other ideas they might wish for the roles to be next time.

_______

I just sent the above to Alex, as the final step in our presentation assignment. As he did last time I sent an assignment, he responded within the hour. I so appreciate this. It’s the opposite of the experience I just wrote about in the entry “Anger”: He seems to “see” me and to give each of us the respect we give him.

This is what he wrote, which touched me:

Ginna: Thanks for this penetrating and very non-defensive look at your group’s dynamics  It seems like your assuming more of a leadership role was a sane and reasonable response to the actions and personalities of your teammates.

I was intrigued by this:

“Because I’m probably the most outgoing of the three (even though I’m highly antisocial in Real Life)”

I was wondering it that meant that your being ‘outgoing’ in the group was a response to the others’ restraint and retreats, or, if Real Life was in caps as a sort of distancing, that that antisocial part is a like a comfortable robe that you put on easily and frequently but that you have many sides, including this outgoing person who emerges when needed and whom you probably enjoy?

Again, thanks for the lesson and these insights. a

And finally, Alex just sent an evaluation of our lesson:

There were many strong aspects to your presentation :

• I loved the summary which included sources for examples and the outcomes and rationale for this kind of lesson
• I was intrigued and educated by your point that words themsleves show the same processes for connected speech as words across boundaries
• You helped people (me) feel secure at the start of the lesson by telling us what the lesson would entail, i.e. giving us an overview
• The activities were really creative and unusual, really captured attention which helps make things memorable, to paraphrase what Thornbury was writing about in defining efficacy.

Things to think about :

• You focused a lot on linking, which is one of the categories you introduced, but linking is often fairly automatic, even for learners, e.g. when we say « good guy » we don’t really need to be taught to drop one of the g’s,  whereas loss of sounds, elision, as in  he took them going to he took ‘em is something more consequential since it really needs to be taught to learners  Connected speech is so complex that you might need to really prioritize what you are going to focus on.
• The terms lax and tense have only been used in class (and in the book) to refer to vowels. You used them for consonants and the pair I observed was unclear and thought maybe it was the same as voiced and unvoiced
• The make your own parable task was not clear enough. The group I observed wasn’t sure what to do on the blank space, one word, a few words, a coherent part of a story.
• « Was it boring ? »  try to avoid leading questions that project your own concerns when you do feedback ; it often pushes students to give you reassurance