PEER LEARNING MINI LESSON

In todays tutorial we were asked to pair up and give a mini lesson about different javascript features. There was a total of 7 groups with different features to teach.

After presenting our mini-lesson I had a discussion with 2 members from 2 different groups and gave each other feedback so we can understand what we learnt from each other and what improvements we could make in the future. To get the most out of this feedback session we stuck to these questions:

ANSWERS

MINI-LESSON CONTENT

1. Me and the other team both planned our lessons on google docs. I used google slides and divided half of the presentation between us this makes it easier for us to research and complete the presentation quicker as we won’t be overlapping the research. Another team decided to use google docs and link their research and write research onto the same document so they can see what each person has done as they can both view the document.
2. Both mine and the other team wanted to get the same key points across like how to use the features in Javascript or where to use the features in Javascript.
3. Both teams used google docs to communicate the ideas. My team used google slides in a presentation format where as the other team presented by speaking to the class and showing the tutorial straight away.
4. Both teams had different assumptions. As my teams tutorial was to teach the class about ‘IF’ statement we had an assumption that the class would not know what it is as we were not taught about this feature in class before. The other team had an assumption that the class know about their mini lesson topic. The feature they were teaching the class were ‘consoles’, the class has been taught this before therefore they felt they didn’t need to teach the simple steps on how to open a console on the internet. Rather they taught the class skills that can be used in consoles.
5. Both my group and their group had a similar level of interactivity where we were open with discussions and and have a give and take question and answer conversation. In my lesson we picked a class member to join in and try to use the function in html.

DELIVERY

1. In my team we gave each other an equal amount of slides to present in class. When it came to the lesson we were able to follow this plan and we both decided to take the questions from class members equally depending on who knows the answers to the questions. Therefore the roles we had were the same. The other team also followed the same guideline and had equal roles.
2. To make sure our mini lesson is organised and presented perfectly my team practised what slides each of us would explain by meeting up 2 times. We ran through each slides and roughly gave an idea to each other of what we should say. The other team allocated each role on their google document and gave their tasks on what to say on therefore they did not meet up physically.
3. The mini lesson started off with all eyes on us and attenti0n from the audience. I was able to capture their attention with my loud projected voice and smile. My friendly approach and saying ‘Hello’ to the class helped the audience to warm up to the presentation.
4. I had a confident body language as I used my hands and moved around to speak this kept the audience leeched onto more presentation. The other team gave good eye contact and kept a straight posture whilst speaking.
5. I had a clear projected voice with a loud volume so everybody could hear me even the people in the back. My pitch was stable and I spoke in a normal pace which showed the class I am confident.
6. The task was to give a 10 minute presentation and my team were able to present it within that time. The other team also followed that timeline and kept it within 10 minutes.

WHAT CAN BE IMPROVED?

The other team felt the improvement my team should have made is for the presentation to be more interactive as we did not have enough audience input in tutorials. I felt the the improvement the other team could make is if there was more planning and interaction with the audience. Furthermore there was an absent member therefore there was no input from the other member in the presentation.