Being in Ms. Toew’s grade seven class for the entire day this past Thursday, I had the chance to closely observe how she communicates with her students. Firstly, I thought she was very direct with her students – she was usually very straightforward when trying to convey what she expected the students to be doing. For example, when she was teaching a lesson and a couple of students began to talk amongst themselves, she just clearly said, “pay attention,” and resumed her lesson. She did not question why they were talking or what they were talking about; she gave them a simple, clear instruction.

However, this does not mean she avoided asking questions altogether. Throughout her lesson she would check up and question students’ understandings as a way of assessing their comprehension of the material. And her responses to students’ answers were noteworthy as well. Rarely, maybe once, did she use the phrase “good job.” Instead, she had pretty consistent replies for each student who answered. For example: “oh yeah, okay,” “yes,” or “you guys found it.” Basically, she avoided praise-based replies like “good job,” which would create student dependency on the teacher. That is, a reply like “good job” has the risk of conveying to the student that the teacher always needs to tell them they are successful or that they are literally “doing a good job.” This then does not allow the students to be able to judge their own progress or work. Whereas when she uses replies like “oh yeah, okay,” she is conveying that she understands what the student is saying. And from here the students can understand even on their own that their answer was correct. In a sense, at times she even tried to become one of the students when they offered answers she had not thought of herself. In these situations she made sure the students knew, she would say, “I’m learning too, I didn’t even notice that.” I thought this was great because through these replies she was conveying to the students that sometimes she misses some points of information as well and that she too is learning with them.

I also noted how Ms. Toews would handle situations where students asked some pretty complex questions or when she sort of had to re-explain a concept. She called these “a teachable moment.” For example, one of these teachable moments was around the class science unit, biomes. To fully re-explain this concept she reworded a definition and provided an example. She also told the students where they could find the information about the topic and again was very straightforward and direct – specifically pointing out the page. This was really interesting for me to observe because it displayed how a teacher must be able to explain some tough concepts in a few different ways in case there were some confusions the first time. And I loved how Ms. Toews handled these moments so calmly and with such ease. This is something I hope to be able to learn from her over the next couple of months.

In terms of general classroom communication I thought Ms. Toews had developed a great balance with the students. She allowed them a good amount of freedom but then she had expectations that the students seemed to truly understand and respect. For example, if a student had to use the washroom during a lesson, Ms. Toews generally would let this slide. Or if the students were done their work, she allowed them to do an activity of their choice. However, when she needed something done from the students she would again directly convey this. For example, after lunch there was some work, which needed to be completed so she firmly asked for complete silence. From what I noticed the students seemed to really appreciate the way Ms. Toews communicated in the classroom. I was part of a conversation in which a group of students said to Ms. Toews how she was strict enough, but she could also be “chill.” For me this was really admirable and again it excites me to have her as my school advisor.

Lastly, I noticed Ms. Toews makes use of a lot of positive communication. She has a system of points called “Sundae Points” in which the class earns a point for any form of positive behavior they display (answering questions, teamwork, behaving appropriately through a fire drill, etc.). She also rewards the children when they engage in any of the “Bothwell High Five” behaviors: “Responsibility, Cooperativeness, Empathy, Kindness, Safety and Courageousness, Respectfulness.” She fills out a slip each time she observed this behavior and the students would be entered into a draw. I could tell this communication system was indeed working because I saw her make use of these slips a couple of times just within the one day I was there.

In the end, I sincerely believe Ms. Toews has a strong sense of communication with her students and this can be seen in how smoothly her class runs. I am very excited and eager to work with her throughout practicum because I can already tell I will learn so much from her not only about communication but various other practices. I think it is also important to include here how welcoming and warm Ms. Toews was with me. She truly made me feel at home in her classroom and in this one day, she offered me so much helpful advice and various tips that will surely come in use.

If I had to pick one word to describe my first day at practicum this past Thursday, it would simply be “rewarding.” I had the chance to experience three quite different grade levels and get a sense of the curriculum, class structures, and methods of teaching involved in each. Being a small school, I was able to interact with almost all of the staff and even some parents. This really opened my eyes to the importance of “community” in this school. That is, all the adults, including parents show such a keen interest in developing the finest learning environment possible for the students. For example, even though the kindergarten parents had just received notification of the Terry Fox Run happening on Friday, they were prepared to volunteer and bring in snacks and drinks for the students – I loved that! In terms of classroom expectations and rules/routines, I thought all three classes I visited had some similarities; however, there were some differences so I will discuss each individually.

In the K/1 class, there were lots of verbal instructions. In fact, when the students were being introduced to a project, the teacher (Ms. Johnson) even said “there is some good news and bad news… the bad news is there is a lot of instruction.” However, she always followed this with reassurance such as pointing out the help students can offer each other or ask for from herself or one of the student teachers. There were many different posters on the wall detailing different kinds of classroom expectations and behaviors. What I noticed was these posters were in locations the smaller students could actually read; for example, by the doors. Democracy and choice was another feature this teacher incorporated into the class routine. For example, somehow she ended up making the statement “J is the best letter” and then she asked the class to vote if they liked the letter J. I thought this was neat because even though the vote was for a simple matter, it indicates to the students the teacher values their opinion. Within my time in the classroom, I observed two main expectations of the students: raising hands and asking for the teacher’s permission for anything outside of the work the students were supposed to be doing.

In the 4/5 class, verbal instruction was key again; however, Mr.Hodgson did this with a more strict and strong tone. Mainly he spoke out the instructions for each lesson and supplemented this with the smart board. For example, he offered samples of the work students were to do on the board and then turned on the board’s timer as a way of letting the students know how much time they had for each assignment. Classroom expectations/rules were also found on posters on the front walls of the classroom – again so that they were easily visible as most students’ desks were facing the front. The main expectations I observed were raising hands to speak and following task-specific instructions such as silently and individually working. Lastly, if students were not adhering to task-specific instructions, Mr.Hodgson made use of warnings; first the student would receive a verbal warning after which their name would go on the board. Apart from this, he allowed students to work freely until he noticed any disruptions or students going off task.

The grade seven class was quite different from the other two in that there was a lot of student self-direction involved. The clearest example I observed was during math: Ms. Toews instructed the students to take notes however she said it was up to the students how they wanted to do this. For example, they could write in their math book, on a loose-leaf paper, follow the method described in the textbook and so on. That said, there were a lot of classroom instructions posted throughout the classroom – there was one whole white board dedicated to posters of ideas like honesty, respect, etc. One that stood out to me was titled “Bothwell’s High 5” which were “Responsibility, Cooperativeness, Empathy, Kindness, Safety and Courageousness, Respectfulness.” Raising hands after the teacher spoke and being on-task were key behaviors Ms. Toews expected of her students. For example, at one point she was still in the middle of a question when students began raising hands, she stopped and asked them to wait for her to complete her question. In the end, I thought this class had a clear balance of restricting rules and student autonomy.