Forward-looking reflective teaching

Ehsan Gorji
Ehsan Gorji
A classroom with students sat at desks and one student stood at the front with the teacher

Ehsan Gorji is an Iranian teacher, teacher trainer and teacher educator. He also designs strategic plans, devises study syllabuses, runs quality-check observations, and develops materials and tests for different language institutes and schools in the country. Ehsan has been a GSE Thought Leader and Expert Rater since 2016.

Reflective teaching, despite it sounding modern and sophisticated, has not yet become a common practice among English language teachers. However, the experientialproposed byoffers a practical approach for teachers. The cycle involves teaching a lesson, reflecting on "what we did" and "how we did them," and then using that reflection to improve future English classes. By using this approach, teachers can prepare for better teaching in the long term.

Why use forward-looking reflective teaching in your lessons?
Play
Privacy and cookies

By watching, you agree app can share your viewership data for marketing and analytics for one year, revocable by deleting your cookies.

Why is reflective teaching important?

Reflective teaching is important to teachers, especially language teachers, for it is one of the few practices that maintains dynamic and healthy teaching. Ranking high along with continuing professional development and lesson planning, reflective teaching prevents teachers from entering autopilot mode – i.e., when a teacher changes from class to class, only battling their growing fatigue.

Reflective teaching helps focus our attention on the responsibility of the teachers to deliver effective teaching and impact students' learning. Language teachers cannot learn for our students; nevertheless, we can pave the way for their learning. Reflective teaching grants us the judiciary seat after each class to listen to ourselves and form accurate and independent judgments on how our teaching assisted, or sometimes impeded, their learning in our classes.

What is forward-looking reflective teaching?

Forward-looking reflective teaching is a new perspective on post-teaching analysis. It starts from the very first and wishes to prepare for the very end. Unlike reflective teaching, which mainly focuses on the 'teaching' phase, forward-looking reflective teaching observes both 'teaching' and 'pre-teaching' phases to gather enough data and analyze it to produce better results in 'post-teaching'. This approach provides language teachers with the following checklist of questions.

  1. How well did I plan my lesson?
  2. Did I design suitable tasks and practices for my students?
  3. Did I set practical assignments for my learners?
  4. Did I support learner autonomy?
  5. How did I treat errors made by my students?
  6. Did I deliver personalized and accurate feedback on each error?
  7. How important was my learners' employability to me?
  8. If I were to teach the same lesson, what would I do the same?
  9. What would I do differently if I were to teach the same lesson?
  10. What is the next step?

What is the forward-looking reflective teaching checklist?

To apply forward-looking reflective teaching and to bring it to our everyday teaching, we can consider examples from the following checklist.

Reflection questions

Planning the lesson

1. Was I aware of which learning objectives I intended to teach?
2. Was I aware of which learning outcomes I needed to follow?
3. Did I curate suitable lesson objectives?
4. Did I carefully inspect the language examples I used in my lesson?
5. Did I explicitly know what I was able to do in my class?

Designing the tasks

6. Did I break my lesson into clear stages, following each other smoothly? For example, preliminary > presentation > controlled practice > freer practice > production/ or: before > during > after/ etc.
7. Did each of my lesson stages intend to push my learners toward the lesson's learning objectives?
8. Did each of my lesson stages intend to push my learners towards the learning outcomes of the course?
9. To what extent did my lesson design give my class an adequate opportunity to practice and generate communication?
10. To what extent did my lesson design provide my class an adequate opportunity to practice and enable collaboration?
11. Did I time my stages well?

Setting assignments

12. Did my assignments target the learning outcomes my learners were supposed to acquire?
13. Especially in , did I set assignments in favor of 'fun and ease' or 'fun, ease and outcome'?
14. Especially in Adult and Professional Learners classes, did my homework assignments intend to develop their employability skills?
15. Did my assignments encourage learner autonomy? How?

Treating errors

16. Did I treat errors or just correct errors?
17. Did I bear in mind that not every error is indicative of an actual issue?
18. Did I sharply distinguish an error from a mistake, and did I treat these two differently?
19. Did I tell faulty knowledge from non-existent knowledge accurately?
20. Did I apply teaching with when appropriate?

Delivering feedback

21. Did I evaluate my students' formative progress against some detailed learning objectives rather than basing it on how others did in class?
22. Did I evaluate my students' summative progress with the precise learning outcomes that their level demanded?
23. Did my feedback on my learners' learning and oral performance help me communicate clear and detailed expectations to the learner, with the aim for them to improve in the future?
24. Did my feedback on my learners' learning and written performance help me communicate clear and detailed expectations to the learner, with the aim for them to improve in the future?

How can I use a forward-looking reflective teaching checklist?

The teaching checklist works better if it is run through regularly. Start from one class each day, and gradually change the rhythm for more. Immediately after your class or later at night, before planning the next class, go through the checklist and add more than your estimated teaching capacity. Ask yourself every one of the questions patiently and note down your answers; they show you where to start for the next class. Some of the questions in the checklist might receive 'Yes'/'No', and some might come up with:

  1. 'Fully'
  2. 'Partially'
  3. 'Not at all'

The checklist works much better if you prepare a plan of action to improve things for the following class(es). Do not feel bad if you score lots of 'No's or 'Not at all's; instead, be inspired to reduce them in the subsequent classes step by step. This checklist is a roadmap to your professional development and more importantly, to better the learning by your students; therefore, welcome it and let it run everyday check-ups on your teaching.

Collaborate with colleagues to share checklists and set up forums. Discuss and learn from each other about inspecting language, error treatment, and feedback delivery. Ask questions to enrich your action plan. Find out how to create effective scaffolding. The forum can cover all parts of the checklist.

Read this blogto better understand lesson planning and inspecting language.Review and revise your techniques and principles in your teaching wardrobe, especially with teaching beginners.

A forward-looking reflective teaching checklist works best if accompanied by the Global Scale of English and its . Years of research by thousands of experts and teachers from around the globe have resulted in a free, excellent bank of learning objectives for different learner types – young, adult, professional and academic. This checklist and approach, alongside the GSE resources, can further equip you with the necessary tools to succeed.

More blogs from app

  • Hands typing at a laptop with symbols

    Can computers really mark exams? Benefits of ELT automated assessments

    By app Languages

    Automated assessment, including the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), is one of the latest education tech solutions. It speeds up exam marking times, removes human biases, and is as accurate and at least as reliable as human examiners. As innovations go, this one is a real game-changer for teachers and students. 

    However, it has understandably been met with many questions and sometimes skepticism in the ELT community – can computers really mark speaking and writing exams accurately? 

    The answer is a resounding yes. Students from all parts of the world already take AI-graded tests.  aԻ Versanttests – for example – provide unbiased, fair and fast automated scoring for speaking and writing exams – irrespective of where the test takers live, or what their accent or gender is. 

    This article will explain the main processes involved in AI automated scoring and make the point that AI technologies are built on the foundations of consistent expert human judgments. So, let’s clear up the confusion around automated scoring and AI and look into how it can help teachers and students alike. 

    AI versus traditional automated scoring

    First of all, let’s distinguish between traditional automated scoring and AI. When we talk about automated scoring, generally, we mean scoring items that are either multiple-choice or cloze items. You may have to reorder sentences, choose from a drop-down list, insert a missing word- that sort of thing. These question types are designed to test particular skills and automated scoring ensures that they can be marked quickly and accurately every time.

    While automatically scored items like these can be used to assess receptive skills such as listening and reading comprehension, they cannot mark the productive skills of writing and speaking. Every student's response in writing and speaking items will be different, so how can computers mark them?

    This is where AI comes in. 

    We hear a lot about how AI is increasingly being used in areas where there is a need to deal with large amounts of unstructured data, effectively and 100% accurately – like in medical diagnostics, for example. In language testing, AI uses specialized computer software to grade written and oral tests. 

    How AI is used to score speaking exams

    The first step is to build an acoustic model for each language that can recognize speech and convert it into waveforms and text. While this technology used to be very unusual, most of our smartphones can do this now. 

    These acoustic models are then trained to score every single prompt or item on a test. We do this by using human expert raters to score the items first, using double marking. They score hundreds of oral responses for each item, and these ‘Standards’ are then used to train the engine. 

    Next, we validate the trained engine by feeding in many more human-marked items, and check that the machine scores are very highly correlated to the human scores. If this doesn’t happen for any item, we remove it, as it must match the standard set by human markers. We expect a correlation of between .95-.99. That means that tests will be marked between 95-99% exactly the same as human-marked samples. 

    This is incredibly high compared to the reliability of human-marked speaking tests. In essence, we use a group of highly expert human raters to train the AI engine, and then their standard is replicated time after time.  

    How AI is used to score writing exams

    Our AI writing scoring uses a technology called . LSA is a natural language processing technique that can analyze and score writing, based on the meaning behind words – and not just their superficial characteristics. 

    Similarly to our speech recognition acoustic models, we first establish a language-specific text recognition model. We feed a large amount of text into the system, and LSA uses artificial intelligence to learn the patterns of how words relate to each other and are used in, for example, the English language. 

    Once the language model has been established, we train the engine to score every written item on a test. As in speaking items, we do this by using human expert raters to score the items first, using double marking. They score many hundreds of written responses for each item, and these ‘Standards’ are then used to train the engine. We then validate the trained engine by feeding in many more human-marked items, and check that the machine scores are very highly correlated to the human scores. 

    The benchmark is always the expert human scores. If our AI system doesn’t closely match the scores given by human markers, we remove the item, as it is essential to match the standard set by human markers.

    AI’s ability to mark multiple traits 

    One of the challenges human markers face in scoring speaking and written items is assessing many traits on a single item. For example, when assessing and scoring speaking, they may need to give separate scores for content, fluency and pronunciation. 

    In written responses, markers may need to score a piece of writing for vocabulary, style and grammar. Effectively, they may need to mark every single item at least three times, maybe more. However, once we have trained the AI systems on every trait score in speaking and writing, they can then mark items on any number of traits instantaneously – and without error. 

    AI’s lack of bias

    A fundamental premise for any test is that no advantage or disadvantage should be given to any candidate. In other words, there should be no positive or negative bias. This can be very difficult to achieve in human-marked speaking and written assessments. In fact, candidates often feel they may have received a different score if someone else had heard them or read their work.

    Our AI systems eradicate the issue of bias. This is done by ensuring our speaking and writing AI systems are trained on an extensive range of human accents and writing types. 

    We don’t want perfect native-speaking accents or writing styles to train our engines. We use representative non-native samples from across the world. When we initially set up our AI systems for speaking and writing scoring, we trialed our items and trained our engines using millions of student responses. We continue to do this now as new items are developed.

    The benefits of AI automated assessment

    There is nothing wrong with hand-marking homework tests and exams. In fact, it is essential for teachers to get to know their students and provide personal feedback and advice. However, manually correcting hundreds of tests, daily or weekly, can be repetitive, time-consuming, not always reliable and takes time away from working alongside students in the classroom. The use of AI in formative and summative assessments can increase assessed practice time for students and reduce the marking load for teachers.

    Language learning takes time, lots of time to progress to high levels of proficiency. The blended use of AI can:

    • address the increasing importance of formative assessmentto drive personalized learning and diagnostic assessment feedback 

    • allow students to practice and get instant feedback inside and outside of allocated teaching time

    • address the issue of teacher workload

    • create a virtuous combination between humans and machines, taking advantage of what humans do best and what machines do best. 

    • provide fair, fast and unbiased summative assessment scores in high-stakes testing.

    We hope this article has answered a few burning questions about how AI is used to assess speaking and writing in our language tests. An interesting quote from Fei-Fei Li, Chief scientist at Google and Stanford Professor describes AI like this:

    “I often tell my students not to be misled by the name ‘artificial intelligence’ — there is nothing artificial about it; A.I. is made by humans, intended to behave [like] humans and, ultimately, to impact human lives and human society.”

    AI in formative and summative assessments will never replace the role of teachers. AI will support teachers, provide endless opportunities for students to improve, and provide a solution to slow, unreliable and often unfair high-stakes assessments.

    Examples of AI assessments in ELT

    At app, we have developed a range of assessments using AI technology.

    Versant

    The Versant tests are a great tool to help establish language proficiency benchmarks in any school, organization or business. They are specifically designed for placement tests to determine the appropriate level for the learner.

    PTE Academic

    The  is aimed at those who need to prove their level of English for a university place, a job or a visa. It uses AI to score tests and results are available within five days. 

    app English International Certificate (PEIC)

    app English International Certificate (PEIC) also uses automated assessment technology. With a two-hour test available on-demand to take at home or at school (or at a secure test center). Using a combination of advanced speech recognition and exam grading technology and the expertise of professional ELT exam markers worldwide, our patented software can measure English language ability.