Classroom Observation Report
Dr. Henry Jones
ENGL 2103
March 31, 2012
1:10-2:25
Smith Hall 203
Respectfully Submitted by Shelley A. Chapman, PhD
Purpose
The purpose of this observation was to provide a mini ethnographic study of a classroom experience
for a professor new to the university in the interest of support and continuous quality improvement.
Having a visitor sit in our classes provides a snapshot in time of a complex and dynamic social
activity, but it is a picture that helps us to see our practice from different eyes. Observations and peer
visitations can provide helpful feedback for us as we work at being critically reflective of the art and
craft of our teaching.
General Impressions
1. Dr. Jones joined the faculty this year. He seems to teach with a singular focus on student
learning which drives the important decisions he makes each day. It is obvious that Dr. Jones
has a deep understanding of and ability to use important learning theories, such as social
constructivist learning theory, scaffolding, and the zone of proximal development, and the
pedagogy of understanding. Examples are discussed below.
2. Dr. Jones is very cordial to all students and greeted many of them personally as they walked
into the room before class began. He joked a little about basketball picks in the championship
games. Students seemed eager to come in to class and to address the professor.
3. Promptly at 1:10, Dr. Jones quietly began to take attendance and said, “Thank you for being
here.” This seemed to send two messages—students will be accountable for being there and
for being on time and that the professor values attendance and promptness.
4. Dr. Jones then asked the students what was different on this day. After a few suggestions,
one student said, “You are sitting down.” At this response, Professor Jones explained that he
had a broken toe and that he would be hobbling in class during this session. It was helpful to
inform students what was wrong and why he was sitting.
5. Dr. Jones used a graphic organizer at the beginning of the class to help remind students of a
very important way of thinking about faith integration. He had spent a great deal of time on
this concept in a previous class. Today’s reminder was to help them understand how
important it is for Christians to be able to differentiate between facts and values and to be
able to use them to create polices. He put this on the chalk board:
Facts
+
Values
=
Policies
6. Dr. Jones also used technology in a novel way. He put this slide on the screen:
Purpose: To persuade my audience that ______________________ is /are
________________________________________________________________
Then, he pulled the screen up and the slide was projected onto the chalkboard where he could
write on the blanks and erase the comments over and over during class discussion.
7. After the class tried to fill in the blanks with a few examples, Dr. Jones demonstrated one
that would not work—to persuade the audience that the sky is blue. It was helpful to show
students what an incorrect response was. Dr. Jones is aware of the need to be proactive to
clear up student misconceptions.
8. After the class had several opportunities to work on this endeavor as a large group, Dr. Jones
asked them to work in small groups. He provided a handout (see attached) that helped
students to differentiate between facts, values, and policies. Dr. Jones understands
Vygotsky’s notion of scaffolding. The handout provided the scaffolding the students needed
to construct a deeper understanding of what a speech to persuade is all about and how they
would create one for this class.
9. Dr. Jones also understands Vygotsky’s notion of the zone of proximal development. This was
demonstrated because while he had a different lesson planned for the day I was scheduled to
observe, I learned later that over the weekend he had a good number of emails from students
who demonstrated a lack of understanding or misunderstandings about how to create a
speech to persuade using facts, values, and policies. That is, they were not where they needed
to be in their understanding. Therefore, on the day of the class, he changed his plan and
designed the scaffolding handout and the social-cognitive activities (using social
constructivist theory) to help students develop a very important understanding.
10. It is important to note that in this speech class, Dr. Jones did not fall into the skill
development trap—of solely focusing on how to write and deliver speeches. Instead, he
methodically and patiently worked on helping them to construct a deep understanding of
what it means to persuade, and how facts, values, and polices are different. I am certain that
students will need to be cognizant of how to write and deliverer speeches in this course, but
in this class session the professor was laying the foundation on which the students would be
able to build important skills.
11. Students got into self-made groups, some of just two students, some of three or four. Of the
20 students present, there were 11 white females, 7 white males, and 2 black females. No
gender or racial differentials were obvious to the observer. One black female seemed
particularly quiet, and she looked very sleepy.
12. As is common, there was some disengagement among students during the group time. Two
students did some texting, one was engaged with her computer, but for the most part, they
were engaged.
13. At the end of the group time, Dr. Jones asked for examples and began to write them on the
board. At this, some students began to argue quite passionately about their opinions on the
merit of the suggestions presented. It was at this moment that the class seemed like a
legitimate college level class deliberating over ideas. Students were very focused, arguing
their points. Dr. Jones stood aside and allowed them to argue with each other, which might
be very uncomfortable for some instructors, but he seemed to understand that the students
needed to do this in order to construct their own understanding. He brought them together at
the end by telling them what he is looking for in their speeches that they will be writing soon.
14. Dr. Jones is very aware of the importance of where he is in the room (social presencing) at all
times. He explained why he was sitting at the beginning; he stood to the side as students
began to argue points about whether something was a fact or an opinion. Moving aside, he
allowed them to grapple with the issues themselves. He intentionally and systematically
moved from group to group showing interest in everyone, giving each group meaningful
formative feedback as they worked (see communication flow chart attached).
15. Dr. Jones gave the students a detailed outline to use as a guide to write their speeches. Once
again, he provided appropriate scaffolding for them. He finished the class by asking the
students to email their topics to him, which would function as an electronic Classroom
Assessment Technique (CAT).
General Concerns and Recommendations
1. There seemed to be an unusual amount of traffic in and out of the classroom. Here is the log
(during group work):
1:30 White female student arrived 20 minutes late
1:32 Black female gets out of her seat and leaves the room
1:37 Black female returns
1:40 White male leaves room
1:43 Another white male leaves the room
1:48 White male returns
1:49 Another white male returns
1:51 Another white male walks back into the room, his departure was not observed.
Therefore, four students were observed leaving and coming back into the classroom during
the group work. This class is right after lunch, and some students may legitimately need to
use the restroom. However, Dr. Jones’s syllabus is one of the most thoughtful on campus.
Under the topics of “common courtesy,” attendance,” “a note about faith and learning,” and
in other places, it seems that he has set the tone for expecting students to be fully present in
the class and to stay engaged throughout the length of the session. It seemed disrespectful of
the professor for these students to move in and out of the class as they did. Perhaps a
conversation about this with the students is all that is needed. They should take care of
personal needs before coming to class.
2. As is the case with most group work exercises, some students allowed others to do the work.
It might be useful to tell them all to get into pairs rather than small groups. This may
decrease the traffic and increase engagement.