Patrick Cole
Observation 6 – Task 4.2: Opening and Closings
Background
The class observed was an oral speaking class with the ALP program at Cal State Fullerton. The class ran from 8:00 – 9:00 AM on March 27 th . The teacher informed me that there were approximately ten students enrolled in the class, but that usually only four or five showed up. He was especially leery that any students would arrive at all due to this being their last class before going on Fullerton’s Spring Break.
It was hard to determine the makeup of all the nationalities because only three students arrived during the period, one of whom was Chinese with the other two students Saudi Arabian.
Before the Class
This task first asked me to define what an “opening” and “closing” are in the context of an ESL or EFL lesson. In my opinion, an opening is the initial 5-10 minute activity of a lesson and usually involves communicative practice, games, or other “warm-up” activities that get the students into English mode.
Reading, writing, and listening tasks are usually not present during the openings because they tend to make the students less motivated. An example of an opening might be students discussing what they did over the spring break holiday or playing a quick interview game with a partner. A “closing” activity is also communicative, but revolves around the lesson’s target language. It differs from an “opening” in that the goals are more specific with regard to the students’ use of the language learned in the lesson that day. Thus, for example, if the students were studying simple past grammar, a “closing” activity might have each individual telling the story of their favorite memory to a partner. This communicative activity incorporates the target language from the lesson.
Personally, I usually open up English lessons with some general, real-world conversation. I always make sure to ask students referential questions (ones I do not know the answer to) so that they are genuinely communicating in the English language. I might ask students what they did the night before, how they feel about a particular topic, what they had for dinner last night, if it’s better to eat at home or eat out,

Patrick Cole or a communicative question related to the lesson. The primary focus of my opening activities are to get the students communicating, often times expressing their own opinions and ideas, and to build rapport with them. To me, it’s interesting learning about my students’ lives and I feel like the “openings” are educational for me as well. A “closing” activity in my mind is very similar in nature to the one described above. It should involve communicative practice, whether that be in the speaking or written form, and should incorporate the target language from the lesson.
In my case, I think the openings and closings are somewhat planned and somewhat natural. My openings tend to be natural conversation, but my closings are more methodical. In my opinion, it’s important for the students to engage in real-life conversational practice. If the lesson is too stilted and structured, language can tend to be robotic and unnatural.
During the Lesson
I wrote a lot for the “before the lesson” section because I frankly do not have much to write in this section. With the students arriving late and the teacher lacking a lesson plan, there simply was not much to observe. It’s always disappointing to observe a class where the teacher simply “wings it.” It can be effective in some cases, especially if natural conversational communication is taking place, but that is not what occurred during this lesson. The class began at 8:00 AM, but the first student did not show up until 8:15 AM. When that student arrived, the teacher greeted him in a friendly manner and asked him several questions about his day. The student was quite low and unable to engage in much conversation, but a short, natural exchange did take place. Thus, in this case, the “opening” was simply the professor asking the student a series of simple questions about their day, English, and the class in general. Admittedly, I do not think that this is always bad. I think simple, natural communication has its place in the classroom and can benefit students tremendously. It’s okay to have natural communicative

Patrick Cole practice in the beginning of a class, even with little to no planning, as long as the rest of the lesson flows in a somewhat structured manner. Unfortunately, that did not happen during this observation.
At 8:25 AM, the remaining two students came in and immediately began using their cell phones. The teacher asked a couple of questions to each one of them similar in manner to the way he addressed the first student. The students’ low English level coupled with their lack of interest left much to be desired during these “opening” activities.
The class continued in a similar vein until about 8:50 AM. At this point, the teacher asked each student what their plans were for spring break. One student replied that he was going to “sleep” and “relax,” while the other two students were planning a trip to Vegas. In the context of this lesson, the “closing” was this question about Spring Break. I also think that this can be effective. The reason I value this natural communicative approach so highly is because these are the types of questions that students will encounter in the real-world. It would be very common for an individual to ask another person what their plans for spring break were. This type of conversational practice also puts the students at ease and can theoretically boost language acquisition. To summarize, however, there should be some meaningful lesson or content between these two bookends.
After the Lesson
I believe that this teacher and I shared some philosophical ideas about openings and closings. We both seem to value a natural, relaxed communicative approach. In terms of priorities, listing what is most important and not as important for openings and closures, I would organize it this way. The most important aspect of an opening is exposure to natural, communicative language. The goal of an ESL classroom is to get our students speaking real English. Secondly, a teacher should gauge the mood of the students and act appropriately. If they seem especially tired, having the students engage in a TPR exercise might get their juices flowing. I don’t think it’s important in every context, but sometimes a

Patrick Cole teacher might also want to connect the opening to the lesson at hand. Some of these decisions have the teacher acting on the fly, which might make the more structures teachers uncomfortable. I think it makes for a stronger classroom however. Regarding closures, as stated above, I think classes should end with a communicative activity that encourages use of the target language from the lesson.
These openings and closures can become prone to ritualization, but that is not always a bad thing. If students expect that they will engage in meaningful conversation at the start of class, they might be more prepared for the activity. If students know that they are expected to speak at the end of lessons, they might be more prone to do so. With that said, however, there is some value to “mixing it up” to keep students actively engaged in the lesson.
Reflection
I don’t think that my openings and closures have become too ritualized and I’m not entirely convinced that ritualization is even a bad thing. Having a ritualized communicative activity at the end of each class is for all intents and purposes beneficial for students. Asking them to speak meaningfully in the beginning of classes is for all intents and purposes beneficial. The good news is that these two activities allow for great variety. The questions you ask in the beginning of lessons and the activities you employ at the end number in the thousands, so even though the class structure is victim to some ritualization, the activities within certainly are not.