Students' feedback on my Russian lessons

On my last Russian lesson I had collected written, anonymous feedback from the students. I asked which things they liked about the teaching and why, which things and how the teaching could be developed or changed, and how they would describe the teacher (me) in few words. I have kept the feedback forms in a plastic pocket, and now I picked some courage to read them through. It’s surprisingly nerve-racking to hear (or to read) the students feedback.

The students had liked the teaching, because there were a lot of exercises and it was versatile. Writing on the whiteboard clarified things and helped to understand. It was important to focus on the pronunciation. The things were taught in way that was easily understandable and clear. There were a lot of creative written and oral exercises and enough repetition, and the dialogue exercises were good, and also the content of exercises.

Several students commented that the teaching contained a lot of extra information and cultural knowledge, because none of the students have visited Russia. I had asked this on the first lesson. Punctuality, calmness and Russian knowledge were appreciated, and also when I shared my own experiences in Russia and my own studies. The atmosphere was good for learning. Someone said that the lessons passed quickly, and I totally agree with this one. Another one said: “It was nice when Maarit was teaching for a change. She shared of her interesting experiences of the Russian culture.”

Reflecting on this feedback, I considered it as important to share cultural knowledge, as well as grammar and Russian language. The real teacher is native Russian, so I brought the students a different view, what Russia and the Russians look like to me as a foreigner, and what kind of observations I have made. The students have taken one semester of Russian before this course, 4 hours per week. In other words, they are still practicing reading and pronunciation, because there are quite difficult, when the script is strange (Cyrillic). I also wanted to have fun in the classroom, not just doing the same routines over and over again.

I’m glad the students liked the exercises and that the classes were not boring. I am quite matter-of-fact person, so I made an extra effort to have variety and surprises on the lessons, just like there are many mysterious and surprising things about the Russian culture.

Then I looked at the negative feedback and ideas for developing my teaching.

Speaking could be more confident and energetic, you don’t have to be shy or afraid of the students. It is not necessary to have several different activities. Describing the tasks could be clearer.

I could challenge and inspire the students more. More exercises from the book could be done together in classroom. There could have been more business vocabulary and we could practice basic verbs more (Oh, there are so many more things that could have been done, but we needed to cover the must items, such as grammar etc. And then, few classes focused on restaurant culture, not the business life). Sometimes the context seemed vague, the teaching could be less scattered (I think this is also due to the fact that so many things had to be learned or covered on one lesson). One student considered the pace a bit slow. One asked for even more knowledge on Russian culture, because very few know much about Russia, even though it is our next-door neighbour.

If there is a task that seems not to be working, you could give up the idea or change the implementation. (I think this refers to the “cocktail party” discussion, that the students circulate freely in the classroom and have short dialogues on the given topic. I still think this is a good exercise, because they need to contact several people and listen to many accents, but the students are shy or unwilling to try it.) Someone commented that in university of applied science, we don’t need to do any kindergarten-style games, and other said that several teaching methods and exercises would suit better a primary school. I guess she referred to numbers and bank exercises, when fake Monopoly money was used. As I observed this exercise, it looked like at least some students enjoyed it.

This feedback is very much to the point and I also recognize myself the need to be more determined and confident when teaching. I did feel a bit shy or apprehensive of the students, I guess because at this age as young adults the students are quite sure of their own opinions and what they prefer or dislike, even though deep inside they could be searching for themselves. The bank game with Monopoly money seemed to divide opinions, and actually the teacher had “warned” of this – she also said that on the level it may not be suitable. I though it was a cute idea and executed it. I guess from now one, I can demand the students more and be a bit more professional and treat them like adults.

Finally I asked the students to describe me as a teacher in few words. Here are the comments: Overall, good teaching. It is a good addition to tell how to act in Russia, to share cultural knowledge.  Peaceful teaching style. Expert, a bit shy. Helpful and easy to approach. Ok, sometimes a bit boring. Quiet, cannot yet control the class at all.  Great to be enthusiastic about her topic. Interesting teaching, I have energy to attend the classes. Lively and expert teacher. Quite clear, we get to know things thoroughly by topics. Interesting, things are explained clearly and in an understandable way. Horosho! A really nice, friendly, and knowledgeable teacher. Spasibo! Da svidaniya!

Again, I recognize myself from these comments. From the feedback I can tell that my teaching objectives were fulfilled quite well. I think I was quite easy on the students and did not give them any strict guidelines, but rather observed how things are going. The students were cooperative and friendly, so there were no disciplinary actions.