DEVELOPMENTAL PROFILES OF OBSERVATION
Pedagogical development for year level 8 and 9
The explicit instruction teaching pedagogy is the dominant pedagogy when it comes to the teaching of level 8 learners. The pedagogy involves a teacher showing the students instructions on what they should be doing and how they should be doing it (Cope, & Kalantzis, 2015). In most of the classes observed, the teacher could always spend much of the time reviewing what he had shown the learners in most of the previous courses, intending to correct the misconceptions that the learners may have, while at the same time helping them understand better what they have already grasped. In the year level 9 classes, the same pedagogy of explicit instruction was dominant in most of the lessons, showing that the two levels of learning have taken the pedagogy as one which can give good results when it comes to the teachers’ content delivery in the classes. Explicit instruction pedagogy was observed six times in the year eight learner classes, while it was found four times in the year level 9 learner classes. The second dominant pedagogy in year level 8 learners is the responsive pedagogy, the responsive pedagogy is a student-centered approach of teaching, which majorly involves the identification of the students’ unique cultural strengths, which could later be used by the teachers to promote the learners’ wellbeing and his achievement. The strategy also involves teachers identifying different gender-based strengths, in girls and boys, which they could use to enhance their understanding of various concepts. The science and technology teachers majorly applied this strategy. The responsive approach was observed four times in the year level 8 learner classes, while it was not found in any of the year level 9 learner classes.
Scaffolding was another pedagogy that was observed as one that is used by the teachers to enhance learning. The tact involves the teachers showing the learners how to solve a problem, and they step back to let the learner solve that particular problem. However, the teachers will always be around to help the learners solve the problem, at whatever point they were stuck. The pedagogy is not so much used in the year level 8 learners, probably because they are not developed still, that they can handle a problem or a task by themselves. It was observed only once for the year level 8 learners. However, the pedagogy should be so much popular for the level year nine students, as seen from their classes. The reason for this is that at this level, the learners are a little bit developed and can handle some tasks themselves, without necessarily needing the help of a teacher. At this level, the learners have also much confidence to approach and consult the teacher (Cordingley, Greany, Coles-Jordan, Crisp, & Coe, 2015), or even draw the attention of the teacher, so that they can get help, which is not so with the level 8 learners, who are shy and are fearful of trying to draw the attention of the teacher. Agentic learning pedagogy should also be used in level 8 learners, although not too much. The reason for this is that the pedagogy involves learners being given a chance by the educators to use their voices as they learn, that is the educators should provide a room for the learners to make decisions, regarding their learning. According to Kabadayi (2016), the pedagogy should not be dominant in this level is that the learners have not yet developed the full capacity which can enable them to make informed decisions and it should be used majorly in the English and geography classes. The pedagogy, however, should be predominantly used in the level 9 learners, just as observed from the lessons, because the learners at this level have a capacity of making informed decisions and therefore should be given room to exercise them. The learners at this level also feel mature, hence giving them a chance of using their voice in learning will go along way to boosting their morale in education, thus leading to great results.
Collaborative, dialogic, and language productive, active pedagogies ought to be used in both the level 8 and level 9 learners, although not in excess. From the observations and findings, the two methods were used just once in both of the standards in their classes. The reason behind this is that the learners of both levels are not yet fully developed to critical think. The methods of teaching involve use of a modeled language and some degree of dialogue between the learners and their educators, which enhances critical thinking. The pedagogies should, therefore, be used in the subjects that are highly discussable, such as literature.
Behavior development profile for level eight and nine learners
From the observation made in the local top school, the behavior trends of the level 8 learners and that of the level 9 learners were not bad. They exhibited an excellent array of behavior in their classes, ranging from the way they conducted themselves to the way they participated in learning processes. The learners in both the year level eight and nine were observed to be always on task during the classes. They entirely concentrated on the learning process and were all independent when it comes to the class work and task performance (Changwong, Sukkamart, & Sisan, 2018). The learners were also respectful to their educators and were always involved in participation during the learning process, as they were observed answering questions and still taking some notes of the major points that were being discussed in their classes. The learners also usually shared ideas and followed instructions, while at the same time, they actively participated in the learning process. It all shows that there is no bad behavior when it comes to the learning process for level 8 and level 9 students.
For the level 8 students, they hardily whisper or engage in any talking when other students are talking, or when the teacher is teaching (Jonas, Crutzen, van den Borne, Sewpaul, & Reddy, 2016). It was sporadic for the learners to engage in such acts, but for the level 9 learners, they were always observed to be whispering and talking, while other students were talking, which shows that this level of learning needs a lot of discipline to handle it. They are never quiet and cannot fully follow a discussion due to destructions from their friends. Level 8 learners are always disinterested as the teachers try to use various pedagogies to motivate the students. They are still not at it, due to their lack of agentic pedagogy capability in their learning. The students in the level 9 year are also disinterested in the learning process, as observed in their classes. The reason for this is due to the application of agentic pedagogy learning style, which brought them out as thinkers in the learning process. They can critically think and evaluate the points given in the course of learning.
According to Chien (2015), level 8 learners are always unfocused and playful in their classes, primarily when the explicit teaching pedagogy is being used. They are always distracted by video games and other things, which move their attention away from the learning process. Although the distraction and lack of focus are expected for the level year nine students, it is not as frequent as that of the level 8 learners. The level 9 learners are also not distracted by video games, because no case of such instance was observed. However, they are distracted by reading other things as the learning process was on course. The distraction on level 9 students also takes place during the explicit instruction pedagogy learning classes. For the standard eight leaners, dawdling and fooling were seen. Some two students expressed it during the learning process. The act was never witnessed for the level 9 students, and this shows that it is a behavior not expected when it comes to level 9 years, while it is somehow expected in the level 8 learners. Even though it should be expected in the level 8 students, it is not that frequent, because from all the classes observed, it is only two levels eight students who were seen with this particular behavior.
Engagement profile for level 8 and level 9 learners
All the students in both level 8 and level 9 years of learning are compliant when it comes to the engagement process during the learning process. The students in both year 8 and year 9 level of education can only concentrate for a maximum of 25 – 30 minutes (Aslan, Esme, Kamhi, Ferens & Diner, 2015). The reason for this could be the young age of the students whereby their minds are not yet fully developed that they can be able to engage in a longer concentration duration. Due to this reason, educators should always find a way of bringing back the concentration of the learners and should be careful to know still when the learners have lost their attention. From the observations made in the school, 80% of the level 8 learners exhibit curiosity and are seen to be engaging when the educators are using the active type of teaching. It shows that this type of learners prefers a kind of learning where they are identified and treated individually. The student-centered teaching approach suites them.
From a study by Ferguson, Morris, Bayne & Woodgate (2015), level 9 learners exhibit 80 % of compliance when the agentic and the explicit instruction pedagogies are applied during the learning process. It shows that in this level of learning, the students are no longer concerned about their treatment in the course of knowledge, but they are so much interested in being given room to discuss and being given a chance to learn through their voice. The students at this level are already developing when it comes to maturity, and therefore, they wish to be considered as those who can be able to make informed decisions. Level 8 students are not committed when it comes to getting everything out of their learning. The students exhibited zero commitment in all of their classes, which prove that commitment is not their discourse. However, for level 9 students, commitment levels are about 20 %. From the observation, dedication to the learning process was only experienced twice in the classes attended. The students in this level of learning also develop some sense of responsibility towards the tasks that they are given, unlike the level 9 learners. Although the standard nine students show some commitment and accountability in the learning process, they hardly reach the levels in learning where they can internalize, interpret, and evaluate information during the learning process.
Conclusion
The observations and finding from the school in my local area indicate that both level 8 and level 9 year students never engage in harmful behaviors such as fighting, bullying, or lying. They only are affected by whispering, talking, and distraction behaviors in their learning process, which can always be handled by the educators who are teaching them. The educators should also be aware of their concentration levels so that they can be aware of what they always need to do to keep the concentration of the learners in the learning process. The two levels of learning also expressed that the best pedagogy of teaching that ought to be used in their learning process is explicit instruction and responsive. The educators should be aware of this and try to use it as much as they can for the benefit of the learners.
Literature review
According to research done by the curriculum developers, the student-centered approach pedagogies are the most effective teaching styles that should be used by educators (Changwong, Sukkamart, & Sisan, 2018). The pedagogies are useful because they make learners to be engaged in the learning process and therefore, retain their concentration when it comes to the class work. For the level 8 and level 9 learners, the educators are expected to be showing them how to perform tasks and should keep on reviewing the learners understanding by going back to the topics that the educated them in the previous classes. According to research done by Hohmann and Weikart (1995), it was realized that learning was most effective when educators reviewed past lessons and that the learners performed well.
In matters regarding behavior, Core Knowledge Foundation in their research found out that level eight and nine learners were not badly off in terms of expression, but the learners were always prone to losing concentration in the learning process due to their young age (Gess-Newsome, 2015). They, therefore, advocated for a system of learning favoring student participation to enable them to keep engaged in order not to be distracted easily. The report by the national research council intended to find the engagement trends in learners found out that the level 8 and 9 students had a concentration span of 30 – 35 minutes, which informed their suggestion that learners in this levels should have lessons lasting for only 35 minutes, in a bid to ensure that the students are not lost in the learning process. The observations made in the local school confirms this kind of literature that has existed, and thus a reason as to why teachers should take it seriously so that they can effectively deliver excellent results in their teaching processes.
References
Gess-Newsome, J., (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill, including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK Summit. In Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 38-52). Routledge.
Changwong, K., Sukkamart, A., & Sisan, B. (2018). Enhancing Thai High School Student Critical Thinking Capability: A New Learning Management Model. Asia-Pacific Social Science Review, 18(1), 175-183.
Ivashchenko, O., Khudolii, O., Iermakov, S., LOCHBAUM, M. R., CIESLICKA, M., Zukow, W., … & Yermakova, T. (2017). Methodological approaches to pedagogical control of the functional and motor fitness of the girls from 7-9 grades.
Kabadayi, A. (2016). A suggested in-service training model based on Turkish preschool teachersí conceptions for sustainable development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 18(1), 5-15.
Cordingley, P., Higgins, S., Greany, T., Buckler, N., Coles-Jordan, D., Crisp, B., … & Coe, R. (2015). Developing great teaching: lessons from the international reviews into effective professional development.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The things you do to know: An introduction to the pedagogy of multiliteracies. In A pedagogy of multiliteracies (pp. 1-36). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Chien, C. W. (2015). Analysis of the Effectiveness of Three Online Vocabulary Flashcard Websites on L2 Learners’ Level of Lexical Knowledge. English Language Teaching, 8(5), 111-121.
Jonas, K., Crutzen, R., van den Borne, B., Sewpaul, R., & Reddy, P. (2016). Teenage pregnancy rates and associations with other health risk behaviors: a three-wave cross-sectional study among South African school-going adolescents. Reproductive health, 13(1), 50.
Ferguson, R., Clow, D., Beale, R., Cooper, A. J., Morris, N., Bayne, S., & Woodgate, A. (2015). Moving through MOOCS: Pedagogy, learning design, and patterns of engagement. In Design for teaching and learning in a networked world (pp. 70-84). Springer, Cham.
Aslan, S., Esme, A. A., Kamhi, G., Ferens, R., & Diner, I. (2015). U.S. Patent Application No. 14/325,740.