Reactions to the Trial from Myself and the Students
In my opinion, the most important part of the mock trial was the debriefing session. I was curious to hear the students’ reactions’ to the project and to see what they had learned from doing this activity. I was also interested in hearing the students reflect on how the trial turned out and if they had any critiques of their work. After the trial, we spent about seven minutes talking about the students’ opinions and reactions. Then, the students had about four to five minutes to write out a response to the activity. I would have liked to dedicate more time to this portion of the class. However, the trial took about 35-40 minutes and a class period is only 50 minutes long. I did not want to push off this portion until the next day because I was afraid that the students would forget their reactions and that by then, the excitement would wear off.
During our conversation, the students in my second period World History class described the activity as “fun” and “different.” They thought that it was great because everyone was involved in the presentation and it gave them some exposure to the courtroom. I think that this is an accurate reflection of their class’s work. In this class, everyone really did put in effort and work during the preparation days and the actual trial. The jury members worked with the witnesses and the lawyers oversaw their entire team to produce a smoothly flowing trial. Even students who don’t seem to usually work very much were enthusiastic about the assignment and put in time and effort to complete the work. This class also said that they thought they could have done better if they would have been more excited from the beginning of the actual trial, because at first, the presentation was a “little weak.” The students also requested that we do more assignments like this in the future and suggested that we have a debate.
I was really impressed with the second period’s performance. To be completely honest, it was much better than I expected. My students in second period generally dislike presentations and usually do not speak clearly and articulately when they are forced to present. Furthermore, the students sometimes appear uninterested when they present, as if they cannot wait to get through their parts. Finally, many of the students also usually require me to prompt them in order for them to continue to speak. During the trial though, students remained on task – even those in the jury and witnesses in the audience that did not have a large speaking part. The students spoke clearly and enunciated their words. I was able to follow the storyline and it was clear that the students were comfortable with their work. As a teacher, it was really great to see my students develop and come out of their comfort zones. I made sure to compliment my students on their performances so that they would be confident to perform like that in the future.
My third period class had a similar, but slightly different, reaction to their mock trial. They also thought that it was a really “fun” assignment because they “got to act out what we were learning.” In addition to being fun, they claimed that this helped the students actually learn the material because they are kinesthetic learners and learn by doing things. They appreciated the fact that they were able to see what a courtroom was like and play the various roles in a courtroom. Moreover, they noted that that their class took the trial a little too lightly because there was frequent laughter and jokes. In my opinion, this definitely detracted from the atmosphere and prevented the students from truly understanding courtroom procedures. These students also thought that it would have been better if they had a larger audience so that they would feel as if they were actually in a trial. I thought this was interesting because they actually had an audience of about 5-7 people, whereas second period only had 3-4 observers. This class also requested that they do more of these active projects, such as debates, plays, and model congresses. I thought that it was interesting that they spoke so positively about the project and claimed that they learned so much because it seemed like they were sometimes fooling around during the preparation time. Most of the students didn’t completely read through the sources and seemed to just ‘wing it’ on the day of the trial. However, when they spoke during the debriefing section, they did actually have a strong grasp on the material and students were able to accurately explain the facts surrounding Galileo’s trial. Moreover, they were able to compare information that we previously learned with information relating to Galileo. This discrepancy demonstrates that my interpretations of what is happening during class may not be an accurate reflection of what the students are actually learning.
Although they put on an accurate mock trial, I was slightly disappointed with my students in 3rd period. These students are generally great at oral presentations and really know how to get their point across using the arts. Many of them speak confidently and routinely choose to use skits to present information. I was therefore disappointed that many of the students did not take the mock trial seriously. It took several minutes for the students to get started because they were too busy talking to each other. Throughout the trial, there was frequent talking and bursts of laughter from members of the jury. Moreover, the students did not seem to even take the material seriously and continually mispronounced words and did not follow trial protocol. I did not want to constantly stop the trial to correct student behavior because I wanted them to have the freedom and autonomy to complete the project in the way that they thought would be best. I think that this class had tremendous potential and fell slightly short of what they could do.
During our conversation, the students in my second period World History class described the activity as “fun” and “different.” They thought that it was great because everyone was involved in the presentation and it gave them some exposure to the courtroom. I think that this is an accurate reflection of their class’s work. In this class, everyone really did put in effort and work during the preparation days and the actual trial. The jury members worked with the witnesses and the lawyers oversaw their entire team to produce a smoothly flowing trial. Even students who don’t seem to usually work very much were enthusiastic about the assignment and put in time and effort to complete the work. This class also said that they thought they could have done better if they would have been more excited from the beginning of the actual trial, because at first, the presentation was a “little weak.” The students also requested that we do more assignments like this in the future and suggested that we have a debate.
I was really impressed with the second period’s performance. To be completely honest, it was much better than I expected. My students in second period generally dislike presentations and usually do not speak clearly and articulately when they are forced to present. Furthermore, the students sometimes appear uninterested when they present, as if they cannot wait to get through their parts. Finally, many of the students also usually require me to prompt them in order for them to continue to speak. During the trial though, students remained on task – even those in the jury and witnesses in the audience that did not have a large speaking part. The students spoke clearly and enunciated their words. I was able to follow the storyline and it was clear that the students were comfortable with their work. As a teacher, it was really great to see my students develop and come out of their comfort zones. I made sure to compliment my students on their performances so that they would be confident to perform like that in the future.
My third period class had a similar, but slightly different, reaction to their mock trial. They also thought that it was a really “fun” assignment because they “got to act out what we were learning.” In addition to being fun, they claimed that this helped the students actually learn the material because they are kinesthetic learners and learn by doing things. They appreciated the fact that they were able to see what a courtroom was like and play the various roles in a courtroom. Moreover, they noted that that their class took the trial a little too lightly because there was frequent laughter and jokes. In my opinion, this definitely detracted from the atmosphere and prevented the students from truly understanding courtroom procedures. These students also thought that it would have been better if they had a larger audience so that they would feel as if they were actually in a trial. I thought this was interesting because they actually had an audience of about 5-7 people, whereas second period only had 3-4 observers. This class also requested that they do more of these active projects, such as debates, plays, and model congresses. I thought that it was interesting that they spoke so positively about the project and claimed that they learned so much because it seemed like they were sometimes fooling around during the preparation time. Most of the students didn’t completely read through the sources and seemed to just ‘wing it’ on the day of the trial. However, when they spoke during the debriefing section, they did actually have a strong grasp on the material and students were able to accurately explain the facts surrounding Galileo’s trial. Moreover, they were able to compare information that we previously learned with information relating to Galileo. This discrepancy demonstrates that my interpretations of what is happening during class may not be an accurate reflection of what the students are actually learning.
Although they put on an accurate mock trial, I was slightly disappointed with my students in 3rd period. These students are generally great at oral presentations and really know how to get their point across using the arts. Many of them speak confidently and routinely choose to use skits to present information. I was therefore disappointed that many of the students did not take the mock trial seriously. It took several minutes for the students to get started because they were too busy talking to each other. Throughout the trial, there was frequent talking and bursts of laughter from members of the jury. Moreover, the students did not seem to even take the material seriously and continually mispronounced words and did not follow trial protocol. I did not want to constantly stop the trial to correct student behavior because I wanted them to have the freedom and autonomy to complete the project in the way that they thought would be best. I think that this class had tremendous potential and fell slightly short of what they could do.