8.

Personal reflection and evaluation

The following is a reflection of an introductory lesson I recently conducted for the
purpose of an instructional practicum with a pair of disengaged, at-risk learners on the
topic of midfoot running techniques. This practicum was an interesting and valuable
experience for me as I reflect upon the various components and factors affecting the
extent of successful implementation of direct instruction (DI) and YouTube videos as
instructional methods chosen for the Physical Education(PE) lesson. Personally, I feel
satisfied in taking a risk by selecting instructional methods out of my comfort zone and
range of experience which resulted in the anticipated steep learning curve for me.

Literature reveals the explicit approach of direct DI has been proven successful and
effective with academically disengaged and at-risk learners ( Kim & Axelrod, 2005, p. 111,
113, 114; Binder & Watkins, 1990, p. 80), which describes my learner cohort.
Furthermore, the clear, organizational format of DI was extremely effective for the PE
learning area where skill mastery was one of the outcomes building upon pre-existing
knowledge and skills of the learners, as the research had suggested (Binder & Watkins,
1990, p. 84; Kim & Axelrod, 2005, p.114; Magliaro, Lockee & Burton , 2005, p. 41, 42, 44,
49; Huitt, Monetti & Hummel, 2009, p. 73, 81). The learners’ attention and engagement
were sustained through the brisk pace of the lesson, constant positive feedback and
reinforcement which are some of the critical attributes of DI (Binder & Watkins, 1990, p.
84; Huitt et al. , 2009, p. 74) . The learners were able to keep up with the lesson
sequences and presentation of content which indicated some success with realistically
matching knowledge and skills outcomes to the learner cohort . I feel this success was
facilitated by a synthesis of both methods; the explicit organization of DI, the learn-by-
doing phase of the PE lesson, combined with a predominantly visual presentation which
tapped into the highly interactive nature of YouTube (Burke & Snyder, 2008, p. 44).

My decision to design the practicum using these instructional methods was prompted by
my concern for learners’ interests and their learning styles (Burke et al. , 2009, p. 73) and
their appropriateness for the PE learning area, with the ultimate aim of meeting learning
outcomes.
In adherence to the principles of DI, the lesson was anchored in the learner-appropriate
vocabulary and opportunities for success were deliberately integrated into the learning
experiences based on realistic yet high expectations of the learners’ knowledge and skills
by the end of this lesson (Binder & Watkins, 1990, p. 84). In hindsight, I could have
simplified the ‘purpose’ component for many of the lesson steps which I noticed became
repetitious and therefore redundant. I now realize my preoccupation with precision and
rigidity led to loss of instructional clarity and brevity in my lesson plan. To respect the
importance of using a scripted presentation for DI (Binder & Watkins, 1990, p.84), I
integrated a modified lesson from a reputable resource (http://www.nyrr.org/youth-and-
schools/running-start/pe-lesson-plans/elementary-school/legs-feet/springy-feet) with
some established PE benchmarks and targets (SHAPE America – Society of Health and
Physical Educators, 2009; Metzler, 2011) for the PE component in recognition that my
professional capacity as an instructor in this learning area is limited to my role as a
mentor for these youth and only in informal contexts.

The use of YouTube clips as an instructional tool to engage and motivate learners (Burke
et al . , 2009, p. 1; Curran, 2013; Burke, Snyder & Rager, 2009, p. 6 ) was a decision I was
satisfied with . I attributed the success of the clips due to their content, short duration and
relevance to the lesson outcomes. The use of YouTube clips was a steep learning curve for
me. As indicated in both learners’ lesson evaluations, I had disrupted the flow of an
otherwise ‘smooth’ lesson sequence due to the advertisements at the beginning of two out
of the 3 clips, which visibly caused them much irritation. I had acted upon the
information in various literature in integrating these clips to support and enhance the
lesson, creating a playlist, checking each clip for validity and credibility as well as
embedding the utility of these clips in meaningful activities (Burke et al . , 2009, p. 6;
Burke & Snyder, 2008, p. 43m 44, Berk, 2009, p. 14) yet I overlooked the interruption of
lesson momentum due to the avoidable annoyance caused by these advertisements.
Indeed, these tech-savvy “digital natives” (Berk, 2009, p. 5) asked why I had not
downloaded the clips to get rid of the advertisements, which highlighted my lack of ICT
knowledge and tech-savviness.

Another critical incident emphasized the importance of competent instructors for the
effective execution of ICT in learning and teaching (Burke & Snyder, 2008, p. 44). The
inclusion of a pen-and-paper quiz showed up as an odd departure from the technology-
oriented PowerPoint presentation and seemed instructionally unintelligent to me upon
reflection. This lack of continuity in instructional design made me look incompetent as an
instructor. While my learners were very understanding towards my oversight in this area
due to our established personal and positive rapport, I could see how such a scenario
could compromise a teacher’s credibility and be seen as a lack professionalism on his/her
part.

I would definitely be interested in doing more lessons using DI as I found this approach
reduced a lot of anxiety and stress for both learners and myself. Rather than being closed
and inflexible as I had initially perceived it to be, scripted dialogue actually felt liberating
insofar as anticipating potential problems and gaps in the lesson. Such a detail-oriented
lesson format requires careful deliberation when designing lessons in relation to
achieving the learning outcomes and student success, hence placing the onus on the
teacher and increasing his/her responsibility and accountability in the learning
experience (Magliaro et al. , 2005, p. 45), which appealed to me. The procedures of each
phase of the lesson has to be constructed in light of the preceding information and the
purpose of each component. It was appealing to me that a DI lesson plan is a dynamic and
living document with the potential to be refined with experience and modified according
to the learning context. I am keen to research further into DI and engage with many more
examples of this method in action, preferably in demonstrations of its use effectively in a
classroom setting so I can see it modelled from start to completion by a competent
instructor.

While my use of ICT and YouTube had some amateur elements in its actual execution, it
was a positive experience in that I have since been prompted by these ‘failures’ into
researching ICT resources which generate more interactice modes of instruction. The
greatest value in this practicum is that it has sparked my curiousity about other
instructional methods to optimize the teaching/learning experiences of my learners and
enable me to be a more effective and responsible instructor in the future.