Weekly Record Book Term 1, Week 5 (2019)

English Language and Literature Department

Name: Mr Timothy Joshua Ong

Term 1, Week 5 (ODD WEEK) :

ORID elements Focus Guiding Questions

Facts, Data  What were the key points you noted about the lessons?
 What did the students actually do during . . . ?
O What?  What did you observe during the . . . ?
Objective  What were the student behaviors you observed?

Reflective questions, Reactions  As you look at the students’ works, what concerns/pleases you?
 How did you feel as you were . . . ?
R  As you reflect on the lessons, what was exciting, surprising, or frustrating about . . . ?
What about the “What”?  Which activities/actions do you think fostered high engagement?
Reflective
Interpretive questions, critical thinking:  What could you have done/could you do to increase . . .?
 What could you have done/could you do to minimize the undesirable . . . .?
I  What other ways could you check for students understanding?
So What?  What did you learn about yourself through this experience?
Interpretive

Decision questions:  What things will you do differently?

 What things will you do the same in future . . . ?
D  Which of your skills will you further develop? And what will you do to develop them?
Now what?  What are your next steps? What actions/ideas has this triggered for you?
Decisional
My Reflections

The thrust of my reflection this week centers on a particular speaking task that I assigned to my sec 3E and 4E
students this past week. The task was entitled ‘World’s End Scenario’. Following up from Prof Lee’s ‘Quarter’s
Problem’, I was particularly interested to investigate and analyse various instantiations of metacognitive
processes. The central problem was that only 13 people remained on earth and that the last remaining rescue
vehicle only has space for 6 of these 13 people. Each of these characters were created with a unique profil
comprising strengths and weaknesses. The strengths ranged from survival skills, to physical fitness, ingenuity,
resourcefulness, experience with childbearing and childraising etc. The weaknesses included hot-temperedness,
mental disorders, addiction to various vices, questionable character traits etc. Classes of 39 students were broken
up into 13 groups corresponding to the 13 characters, and each group had to argue for why they were the best
candidate to be saved, and why one other candidate ought not to be saved. The ultimate goal for the 6 chosen
characters was to re-populate earth.

I gave each group / character a slip of paper as well to jot down their thought processes and what I gathered after
was fascinating.

<<< Screenshots / Refer to hardcopies >>>

I witnessed instances of online monitoring and regulating as groups tried to reason and argue about the various
tenets of their characters. They probed deeper into more metacognitive lines of reasoning as they strived to qualify
which of the negative traits were deemed more or less severe than others. Moreover, in justifying their strengths,
they were able to back up their claims with various explanations and substantiations which stemmed from their
contextual knowledge and personal experience.

What was interesting was also how everyone’s affective resources were activated through this activity as well.
Some groups got carried away a little and the verbal presentations of their points became more personal and
emotional. This made me realise that all these cognitive, metacognitive and affective resources were all at play,
firing to different degrees and manifesting to different extents in the course of this task.

I am endeavouring to continue to create and develop more mulit-faceted taske related to English Language and I
hope to grow in my analysis and processesing of my students’ metacognitive abiliites. These, in the grander
objective of also honing my own metacognition as an educational practitioner.

Reporting Officer Signature: _______________________

Date: _______________________