Lesson One Reflection-Self-Assessment
Student’s name Nino Gegetchkori
Grade VIII
Date and time: 04.24.2025 ; 12:00
Lesson evaluation criteria1
№ Evaluation Criteria Score (1–4)
4–
1 Lesson planning in accordance with the goals of the ESG
Excellent
4–
2 Creating a positive learning environment
Excellent
4–
3 Providing a variety of stimulating activities to achieve the goal
Excellent
4–
4 Establishing a logical sequence of activities
Excellent
4–
5 Utilizing modern communicative teaching methods, strategies, and techniques
Excellent
6 Effective time management 3 – Good
7 Delivering clear instructions 3 – Good
Utilization of resources such as manuals, visual aids, blackboards, projectors, 4 –
8
etc. Excellent
Offering a variety of social forms (individual work, pair work, group work, 4–
9
whole-class activities) Excellent
4–
10 Assessing students’ language competence and adapting language accordingly
Excellent
4–
11 Providing feedback
Excellent
Guiding questions for reflection2
1
4 is maximum and 1 is minimum.
2
Do not answer the questions: yes, or no. Reflection is written in the form of the narrative. Give the analysis of the
conducted lesson. Reflection may be written either in Georgian or English.
ზემოთ მოცემული კრიტერიუმების მიხედვით გაანალიზეთ თქვენ მიერ
ჩატარებული გაკვეთილი, ეს კითხვები დაგეხმარებათ ფოკუსირებაში.
1. Analyze the conducted lesson and achieved outcomes based on
the criteria given in the table.
Overall, I believe the lesson was well-planned and aligned with the ESG
goals. The activities were diverse and aimed at encouraging students to use
advanced past simple verbs in both structured and creative ways. I followed
the PPP approach, which supported a clear progression from input to output,
and students appeared actively engaged throughout the 45-minute session.
I was able to create a positive learning environment (criterion 2) by showing
genuine interest in student responses and encouraging peer collaboration.
Students seemed comfortable asking questions and sharing ideas, especially
during the production stage. I used varied social interaction formats
(criterion 9), such as pair work and group reflection, which fostered peer
learning and made the classroom more dynamic.
My use of modern communicative techniques (criterion 5) was evident in the
integration of authentic audio materials and the focus on real-life narrative
writing tasks. The resources (criterion 8), including flashcards, an audio
script, and a gap-fill story, were well-prepared and helped make the lesson
more engaging.
2. What have I done well and why?
I believe my lesson planning (criterion 1) was particularly strong. The
objectives were clear and realistically achievable for the students’ level (A2-
B1), and each stage of the lesson built toward those objectives. Also, I think I
encouraged student reflection and feedback successfully (criterion 11),
especially through the use of self-assessment questions and exit tickets.
These encouraged metacognitions and gave students space to monitor their
own learning.
3. Did I have to change the course of action during the lesson?
Yes. During the production stage, I noticed that a few students were taking
longer to develop their mini-memoirs. I decided to shorten the sharing part
slightly to allow more time for writing. I also allowed some students to
complete their stories as homework. This flexibility ensured that students
didn’t feel rushed and could maintain the quality of their work. I believe this
decision was effective and helped reduce stress while preserving the goal of
the task.
4. What areas of my teaching need improvement?
2
I need to improve time management (criterion 6), especially during the
production stage. Although the timing was generally balanced, I
underestimated how much time some students would need to complete and
share their writing. In the future, I will either allocate more time for this stage
or consider using a two-part lesson for similar tasks.
Additionally, giving clearer instructions (criterion 7) for the production task is
something I would like to refine. Some students asked for clarification after I
gave the instructions, which indicates that my explanation could have been
more structured or supported visually.
5. What would I change if I conducted the lesson again?
If I were to conduct this lesson again, I would prepare a model mini-memoir
to show students what is expected in terms of structure and tone. This would
help clarify the task and reduce uncertainty. I would also set stricter time
checkpoints during the writing process to better guide students and ensure
time for feedback at the end.
Final Thoughts:
This lesson helped me grow in confidence as a teacher. I learned that even
well-prepared plans may need to be adjusted on the spot, and being
responsive to students’ needs is essential. I aim to continue developing my
classroom management, clarity of instruction, and scaffolding strategies in
future lessons.
სტუდენტის რეფლექსიის შეფასების სქემა
შეესაბამება - 1 ქულა, არ შეესაბამება - 0 ქულა
# შეესაბამება არ
3
შეესაბამება
1 სტუდენტი აანალიზებს და აფასებს მის მიერ ჩატარებულ
გაკვეთილს, მიღწეულ შედეგებს
2 სტუდენტს დასაბუთებული აქვს გაკვეთილზე
გამოყენებული აქტივობების ეფექტურობა მიზნის
მისაღწევად
3 სტუდენტი აღნიშნავს, მოხდა თუ არა გაკვეთილის გეგმის
/ განსაზღვრული აქტივობების მოდიფიცირება
გაკვეთილის მსვლელობისას, აღწერს და ასაბუთებს ამ
ცვლილებების აუცილებლობას
4 სტუდენტი აანალიზებს გამოვლენილ ხარვეზებს /
დაშვებულ შეცდომებს და გამოაქვს სათანადო
დასკვნები, სახავს საკუთარი საქმიანობის გაუმჯობესების
გზებს
სტუდენტის რეფლექსიის შეფასების მაქსიმალური ქულაა 4. რეფლექსია
დადებითად შეფასებულად ჩაითვლება, თუ ის დააგროვებს ქულათა მაქსიმალურ
რაოდენობას.
გაკვეთილი რეფლექსიის გარეშე არ ჩაითვლება ჩატარებულად.
