Gideon Raucci - Lab D Nohjebal

What?
 What I was responsible to teach the class was the Strike in 11th grade.  In 9th and 10th grade, they have already learned to Control, Pass, and Serve.  Both Passing and Serving each have a different part of the foot to hit, different part of the angle of the foot, and a certain level of power to hit.  When applying the Strike into the mix, it added flavor and excitement to the students.  I demonstrated the strike to them first, then I broke it down for them.  I even demonstrated a different angle for them to see.  Then I added an inclusive progression if students felt comfortable to add in the serve, control, pass/set up, then strike.
Even though the strike must be powerful to be effective, I stressed to students (assisted by Tom Hughes) to focus more on the technique itself than power.  They broke into groups of 2 and each group got with another group and had their own net.  Each group that had a net only had one ball, so when one group strikes it, the other group retrieves it and then they strike.  When I allowed them to practice, there were few encounters where students had a hard time striking it downward and instead went upward.  Though I demonstrated my strike well, I believe I should have added in what not to do, or a wrong way to strike it.    
    



Cues on the Strike
Gut
The feeling I received from this was eustressful.  I was nervous yet happy at the same time that I was teaching something that nobody knew.  At the end of explaining it to them and letting them go off, I felt like I probably went a bit too fast explaining it to them.  Once they were off, I noticed some confusion of how they were suppose to strike the ball which I felt I must have lacked something in instructing the students.  I was yet happy to interrupt and tell some students what they were having trouble with teach them in more detail how to strike the ball.  Once I saw students do better on striking the ball, I felt relieved.  I know I also encouraged inclusiveness for them to progress but there came a point where only one group was attempting and the another group wasn't.  I later instructed in a command style that everyone had to progress to the next thing.  For the amount of time I had, I wasn't sure how the other students felt to be forced to progress but they were going to be in a game like situation for the next segment.  I didn't want to be that mother bird to push the baby birds out of the nest, but I felt that they were ready to fly to the next lesson.  Even though I was good have giving my feedback, I felt I approached it very commandingly than to use the problem solving approach.  

So What?  
 What I learned about myself from teaching this activity is that I needed to add in the wrong way of performing an execution because students are bound to do something wrong but they would know how they did it wrong so they can do something right like what Thomas Edison said "I will not say I failed a 1000 times, I will say I discovered a 1000 ways that can cause failure".  The other thing is that the students were really good with safety even though I did not remind them.  But it makes sense, for each new skill that is being taught there should be a reminder or maybe an add on to a different safety for a particular situation for students to grasp.  Though the intent was there for safety when the 2 groups had their own net striking, the purpose of it was to have many repetitions and safety so students do not have to chase the balls.  In psychology when being taught a new skill, students could accidentally put that skill into a new schema but not taking the safety aspect along with them.  I chose to go to each person to help them with their skill, but after the activity I realized I could have killed 2 birds with one stone if I whistled for the class's attention and tell them what I noticed as a mistake and then explain the right way of doing it in detail, it would have saved everyone's time and progress.  What also would have saved time was to use the guided discovery.  "The teacher knows the answer to the problem but leads the learner to discover the answer for himself/herself" (Rink, 2010, page 173) because that's when students start to really own their idea of why they execute certain ways.    


Now What?
Every time I teach one thing and noticed I forgot to implement somethings to my teaching.  When I teach the next time, I notice later that I filled in what I didn't before but what I put in before is not implement it in.  Then I see a result of what really happens when I don't add one thing to the class.  Just like Thomas Edison, I learned what happens when I do make a mistake and see the result of it.  To know everything wrong so I can do everything right.  It hurts to say but it seems the more I teach and see myself, the more I learn how to teach.  I'll always rehearse what I'm suppose to do or what to bring up, but seeing the result of teaching the activity teaches me how to teach.  What would really help me for next time is to glance over at a clipboard of notes on what next to do, or if I told them everything I wanted to tell them about a certain something.

Reflection of Labs A/B/C/D/Student Learning

Its been a funny ride.  I noticed from Lab A and B, I was pretty eccentric and enthusiastic but I wasn't so focused on the little things.  Once it got to lab C, my mood changed.  I was trying to go for a different emotional approach for the class and to be more analytical in class.  I felt it was 2 different feelings of me in each of those 3 labs, but none of them I felt I had a feeling of success.  Finally for the last one, I brought my enthusiasm up but not as up as before and was less analytical but not too much.  I felt a lot more balanced in my last one, not absolutely comfortably balanced but better.  
      As for the students comprehension, I know that students were pretty confused on what to do for Lab B and C, especially lab C.  I learned that I really made things very hard for myself.  I believe its because I want them to get something out of it, but the more I want to offer them, the more I get confused on how I want to offer it to them.  By teaching the strike really revealed to me that that in itself is enough to show the class.  It's a hard technique but simple to cue and it helped students to digest and learn it.  I felt better to give detailed corrective, and positive feedback to students for them to really accept and actually as a result showed that they learned through doing it correctly.  I was more present and giving to students than thinking too much about what I need to do next.  The biggest thing I learned is to make things simple, and when things are simple, everything else is less stress, easier to focus not only to do what's next but to pay attention to the students. 

Me demonstrating the Strike to the class