Exam in EDID4001 – Quality English Teaching
The exam is an individual student lecture (”pr?veforelesning”) on a chosen topic of classroom observation. The lecture includes presentation of results from data analysis, as well as relevant literature from the course reading. The lecture is held to the course teacher and co-students, but will also be open to an external audience.
The obligatory written assignment (research design) needs to be passed to be able to perform the student lecture for the exam.
Detailed information
For the exam you will use what you have learnt about classroom observation to give a lecture about quality English teaching (20 minutes) to student teachers in English didactics (LeP/PPU). You can choose the same topic of classroom observation as you presented in your oral presentation and information about research design from your written paper. The aim of the lecture is to show student teachers how you have analysed English classroom instruction to identify quality English teaching, present your findings of what you have identified as successful teaching, discuss these using theory and previous research on the EDID4001 syllabus, and suggest topics for future research and/or MA projects. You should be able to discuss the relevance of the topic for English teaching and assess the quality of the observed teaching practices. You will be expected to use digital tools of your choice in your presentation, and to include an explanation of how you used data programmes to analyse the classroom observations. The lecture will also be open to your co-students and an external audience.
Criteria of assessment
|
Grade |
UiOs definition |
The subject's cirteria of assessment |
|
A |
An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgement and a high degree of independent thinking. |
The candidate shows excellent overview and understanding of themes related to quality English teaching. The analysis of classroom instruction is focused, thorough and soundly based. Theory and previous research is used in a good way to illuminate important aspects of the empirical data. The candidate uses appropriate presentation techniques and analysis software, and the lecture is given in a very clear and communicative manner. The candidate exhibits sound judgement and a considerable degree of independence. |
|
B |
A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a very good degree of independent thinking. |
The candidate shows very good overview and understanding of themes related to quality English teaching. The analysis of classroom instruction is focused and soundly based. Theory and previous research is used to illuminate important aspects of the empirical data. The candidate uses appropriate presentation techniques and analysis software, and the lecture is given in a clear and communicative manner. The candidate exhibits sound judgement and a considerable degree of independence. |
|
C |
A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas. |
The candidate shows good overview and understanding of themes related to quality English teaching. The analysis of classroom instruction is thorough and soundly based. Theory and previous research is used to illuminate relevant aspects of the empirical data. The candidate uses appropriate presentation techniques and analysis software, and the lecture is given in a communicative manner. The candidate exhibits fair judgement and a certain degree of independence. |
|
D |
A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking. |
The candidate shows some understanding of central themes related to quality English teaching, but shows signs of lacking overview. The analysis elicits some relevant aspects of classroom instruction. Theory and previous research is used, but not made particularly relevant to the empirical data. The candidate uses presentation techniques and analysis software, but the lecture does not communicate particularly well. The candidate exhibits some judgement and degree of independence. |
|
E |
A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking. |
The lecture meets the minimum requirements. The candidate shows some knowledge and understanding of the most central themes related to quality English teaching, but lacks overview. The analysis elicits some aspects of classroom instruction, but is mainly descriptive. Theory or previous research is referred to, but is not made relevant to the empirical data. The lecture shows some mistakes or aspects of misunderstanding. The candidate does not exhibit any particular judgement or degree of Independence. |
|
F |
A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking. |
The lecture does not meet the minimum requirements. The candidate shows no or very limited knowledge and understanding of themes related to quality English teaching. The analysis is purely descriptive. If theory or previous research is referred to, it does not illuminate the empirical data. The lecture is unclear and characterised by mistakes and misunderstanding. |