Field Study Reflections - timhiggins.weebly.comtimhiggins.weebly.com/uploads/5/8/2/5/58255699/tim_higgins_term... · Field Study Reflections Tim Higgins EPSY 505 Term Project Page

Field Study Reflections EPSY505 Educational Psychology Term Project

Tim Higgins

11/16/2011

Field Study Reflections

Tim Higgins EPSY 505 Term Project Page 1

Contents

1. Introduction and Descriptive narrative (Guiding question#1)

Table 1: Teachers “A” and “B” Student Diversity

2. Teacher’s Roles (Guiding question# 2)

3. Active Teaching (Guiding question# 3)

Table 2: Teacher Lectures, Presentations, and Demonstrations Checklist – Teacher A

Table 3: Teacher Lectures, Presentations, and Demonstrations Checklist – Teacher B

Table 4: Teacher Lectures, Presentations, and Demonstrations Checklist – Teacher C

Table 5: Questioning Techniques & Coding

4. Classroom Management (Guiding question# 5)

Table 6: Classroom rules, routines, transitions and group management

Table 7: Student Engagement Coding – Teacher A

Table 8: Student Engagement Coding – Teacher B

Table 9: Student Engagement Coding – Teacher C

5. Final Reflection (Conclusion)



Introduction and Descriptive narrative

The following paper will describe and discuss my field study term project undertaken at John Jay

Senior High School in Hopewell Junction, New York. This school was chosen for a number of reasons;

primarily, its size offered accessibility to many classes and teachers. It is one of two public high schools

in the Wappingers Central School District. It serves approximately 2200 students in grades 9-12. Also, I

graduated from this High School and would have the added advantage of observing current conditions

and comparing them to the past.

“John Jay Senior High School made AYP in 2010. Under No Child Left Behind, a school makes

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) if it achieves the minimum levels of improvement determined by the

state of New York in terms of student performance and other accountability measures.

In 2007, John Jay Senior High School had 16 students for every full-time equivalent teacher. The New

York average is 13 students per full-time equivalent teacher. The ethnic mix of the student body is as

follows:

White = 81% Hispanic = 8% Black = 6% Asian/Pacific Islander = 5%

The Wappingers Central School District spends $13,642 per pupil in current expenditures. The

students attending this high school are primarily from middle class families with only 6% of students

eligible for free or reduced price lunch programs in 2010.” (Demographic data source:

http://www.education.com/schoolfinder/us/new-york/hopewell-junction/john-jay-senior-high-school/#overview)

John Jay Senior High School first opened in 1969. Some modernization has taken place over the

years but much remains the same since the late nineteen seventies when I attended this school. Certain

things are simply run down. Bathrooms, furniture, and fixtures are mostly original with areas needing

paint and maintenance. Teacher desks and credenzas in classrooms were original, evidenced by poor

condition and inscribed with faculty names that have long since retired. Most student murals remain

http://www.education.com/schoolfinder/us/new-york/hopewell-junction/john-jay-senior-high-school/#overview



from the nineteen seventies, celebrating music from that era. Diversity was celebrated in a variety of

hallway displays. One display focused on ethnic and holiday traditions. The school’s exterior needs

cosmetic maintenance and landscaping upgrades.

The school continues to have robust sports, music, and drama programs. The most unsettling

aspect was the daily presence of armed local police officers stationed in the school.

It is within this context that field study observations were performed from September 20

through September 22, 2011 for approximately 12 hours. I observed eleventh grade Social Studies

classes taught by one teacher with additional observations of another eleventh grade Social Studies

teacher for comparison. Additionally, I observed a tenth grade Social Studies class, conducted by a third

teacher, not to provide additional data for comparison of teacher styles, but to gauge the general

differences in student behaviors between one grade level. Unexpectedly, this observation provided a

marked contrast to the two previously observed classroom and teaching styles. The guiding tool for

classroom observations and data collection was the Classroom Observation Package which includes

forms from Good and Brophy’s text: Looking in Classrooms, 10th edition. Prior to my first day of field

observations, I put together this package to focus my observations on classroom management, teaching

methods, and student engagement. Also, I kept a Fieldwork Journal to supplement the data collected on

the forms. Journal entries consisted of more in-depth notes on classroom activities.

The link to this package is:

https://ilearn.marist.edu/access/content/user/10043047%40marist.edu/My%20Documents/EPSY%20505/Term%20Project/Classroom%20observation%20package.pdf

The following paragraphs describe the context in which I performed classroom observations.

This context includes the physical layout of the classrooms, noteworthy learning exhibits, and student

composition. A brief interview was conducted with the most observed teacher. Also, an interview was

conducted with a student.





The most observed Teacher is denoted as Teacher “A” or “Able” throughout this paper. I

observed seven classes during the three day period. One entire class period was spent listening to a

historically and culturally significant radio program. The other six classes can be classified as “active”

with teacher presentation and class engagement as central to the learning experience. This Teacher’s

techniques will be discussed under guiding questions 2, 3, and 5. During periods that were consumed by

testing, I observed procedural flow during test initiation and excused myself to observe other classes.

The seven classes are broken down as follows:

Grade 11 AP Social Studies – American History: Two sections, Periods 1 and 4

Observed four classes.

Grade 11 Social Studies – Society and Culture (Elective): One section, Period 3

Observed 3 classes

This teacher’s classroom was functional and stimulating despite the generally worn out look of

the furniture and fixtures, circa 1969. The most prominent feature of the classroom was the Smartboard

and was used extensively by this teacher. Posters of the Presidents occupied the entire east wall with

other exhibits being informational and not interactive. Desks were arranged in rows.

The composition of the students in Teacher “A” and “B”s classes are as illustrated in table 1

below. My observations on diversity seemed skewed high in relation to the published diversity

composition of white students. There were no Hispanic students in any of the classes I observed. This

discrepancy may be explained through errors associated with inadequate sampling. One error could

point to the small sample size. Another could point to the type of classes (Advanced Placement, Honors)

that may require advanced reading comprehension, possibly not present in the Hispanic population in

this school. This would be especially true if English learning is initiated at the high school level. This is

speculative and would require additional observations and interviews with school officials to gain a

better understanding.



Table I. Teachers “A” and “B” Student Diversity

Class Teacher Males Females White Black Hispanic Pacific/ Asian

Remarks

Period 1 - 11th

grade SS A 20 10 23 3 0 4 AP Period 3 - 11

th grade SS A 12 11 21 2 0 0 Elective

Period 4 - 11th

grade SS A 12 8 20 0 0 0 AP Period 2 - 11

th grade SS B 10 17 23 1 0 3 Honors

Sample Percentage % 54% 46% 87% 6% 0% 7%

Source: Classroom observations 9/20/11-9/22/11

I conducted a brief interview with Teacher "A." He is considered a “Master Teacher” by the

Department Head and has accrued 14 years of teaching experience. He was very approachable and it

was clear he was liked by his students. His key focus was on student engagement and strives to “mix it

up” aiming for a dynamic balance between “what to know” and “how to know it.” He would like more

help in the classroom at times (most of his classes were over 25 students) utilizing a team teaching

concept. Also, more help is needed in screening and gathering resources for presentations in the

classroom. His strategies reflect a teacher-centered active teaching approach. Classes are considered

too large to work with another strategy such as extensive group work.

As a contrast to Teacher “Able”, I observed Teacher “Baker” conducting two active classes. The

class was Grade 11 Social Studies Honors - American History. I observed the same class for two

consecutive days. The composition of this class is shown in Table 1. This teacher used a variety of

dynamic teaching techniques that will be discussed under guiding questions 2, 3, and 5.

This classroom was decorated with pictures, murals, maps, and timelines. A Smartboard was

available. There were various stations around the classroom that displayed materials for upcoming

modules. The student desks were arranged in fours in table-like fashion for group work. The furniture

and fixtures in this classroom were old and run down. The venetian blinds were broken. Supplies for

group work were at the end of their useful life.



In addition to Teacher A and B, I observed Teacher “Charlie” conduct one class in tenth grade

Global History. Class composition was not recorded. In contrast to the previously described classrooms,

this classroom would be considered spartan with no displays, no murals, and no posters. All bulletin

boards were empty. A Smartboard was available but the chalkboard was used for presenting data. Desks

were arranged in rows. A brief discussion of Teacher “Charlie’s” classroom and teaching style under

guiding questions 2, 3, and 5 will provide a stark contrast to both Teacher “Able’s” and Teacher

“Baker’s” techniques.

I conducted an informal interview with an African American female student prior to first period

class on Thursday, September 22. She was more than happy to discuss her experiences at this high

school. She is a college bound junior who participates in the debate club and orchestra. She remarked,

“It’s a good school, I like it.” However, she feels the school is crowded and understaffed. Specifically,

classes have too many students and there are only six guidance counselors for a large student body. This

became important to her when the guidance counselors were not as accessible as she thought they

would be as college admissions became a priority for her.

Teacher’s Roles (Guiding question# 2)

Each of the observed Teachers played different roles in their classrooms. The most observed

teacher was Teacher A. This teacher used active teaching in the form of presentations with interesting

exhibits. Throughout the presentations, students were questioned and brief discussions ensued. It was

clear that each class had its complexities and quick decisions were being made in phrasing questions

properly and explaining exhibits. The classes moved at a brisk pace and presentations always finished by

the end of the period, with this teacher being mindful of controlling the amount of questioning and

discussion. It was clear that Doyle’s dimensions were at work. The Teacher was simultaneous juggling

events that usually happened right before and after the beginning bell. Students would approach the



teacher to discuss individual, private problems. He never seemed rushed or dismissive but moved the

private discussions along quickly, balancing sensitivity toward the student with the time pressure of

starting the class. Doyle also points to the unpredictable nature of the classroom. This teacher dealt with

unplanned interruptions quickly (in one period, a fan fell out of the window) and class was back on track

within seconds. There were a number of instances of disengaged and unresponsive students. In the

majority of cases, this was not corrected. This is explored in further detail under guiding question #5.

Unresponsiveness was not an issue in Teacher B’s classes. The teaching approach was very different

with Teacher B not actively presenting but coaching students in group work. Every student was engaged

with most engrossed as they worked critically through putting together a presentation. At face value, it

was first perceived that the Teacher B’s engaging presence was driving the entire process. However, it

was clear that a great deal of thought and strategy went into staging such a high level of engagement.

This reflects Nate Gage’s assertion that good teaching is a complex art with scientifically tested

techniques and keen observation leading to teaching effectiveness. Teacher “B” is also considered a

master of his art, obviously honed through many years of reflective experience.

I also noted that both Teacher A and B revealed creeping cynicism--based on school conditions,

class loads, and crowding. This did not deter them from teaching in the best way they could. I did not

have in-depth conversations regarding their motivations and satisfaction with teaching. More of

McLaughlin’s (“Why Teacher’s Won’t Teach”) elements that lead to increasing dissatisfaction and

teacher failure may have been uncovered if this was explored more.

Elements of Berliner’s metaphor “The Teacher as Executive” were present throughout my

observations. The executive functions of teaching--planning, regulation, creating a pleasant

environment, motivating, and evaluating--were all clearly used on a daily basis. The other functions

were not specifically observed. These included developing budgets and working with other adults. Both

Teachers A and B had planning decisions to make regarding their American History lessons. Teacher A



chose presentation and questioning and Teacher B chose group work to deliver the same content. More

planning goes into the variables associated with group work. Both teachers regulated their

environments by pacing the presentations and activities properly and ending the lesson at the right

point. Additionally, the classrooms were pleasant environments. Both teachers fostered respect and

cooperation. They smiled and laughed frequently. They motivated and evaluated by questioning

techniques and their dynamic presence (and testing, of course). The executive metaphor implies a

rational decision maker and problem solver in the face of competing and sometimes unknown forces.

This is done with a pleasant and inviting presence. This executive approach was evident in these two

teachers.

Active Teaching (Guiding question# 3)

Almost every class I observed used the active teaching approach. Table 2 summarizes Teacher

A’s presentations. The table is noted with plusses and minuses. The plus indicates these elements were

performed very well. The minus indicates that the element was lacking or needing something additional.

An asterisk indicates that an additional explanation will be provided.

Table 2: Teacher Lectures, Presentations, and Demonstrations Checklist

Data derived from Form 10.1

Teacher A “Able” Lecture number

1 2 3 4 5 6 Introduction A. States purpose or objectives + + + + + - B. Gives overview or advance organizer + + + + + + C. Distributes a study or note taking guide +* + + + + + Body of Presentation D. Well prepared, speaks fluently + + + + + + E. Projects enthusiasm for material +* +* +* +* +* F. Maintains eye contact with students + + + + + G. Speaks at an appropriate pace and modulates

voice + + - + +



H. Uses appropriate expressions, movements, and gestures (rather than speaking woodenly) + + + + +

I. Content is well structured and sequenced + + + + +* J. New terms are clearly defined + + + + + K. Key concepts or terms are emphasized not just

verbally +* +* +* +* +*

L. Includes appropriate analogies or examples + + + + + M. Facts distinguished from opinions + + + + + N. Presentations divided into segments with clear

transitions and summaries +* + + +* +

O. When necessary, questions students following each major segment, rather than waiting until end.

+* + + + +

P. Monitors student response, encouraging and responsive + + + + +

Conclusion Q. Concludes with summary or integration of

presentation + + + + +

R. Invites student questions or comments + + - + + S. Follows up on the presentation by making a

transition into activity or assignment that reinforces material learned.

Comments: Enthusiastic

+ + + + +

Source: Classroom Observation Package Dates: 9/20/11 to 9/22/11

The predominant tool of Teacher A was PowerPoint presentations on the Smartboard. His

introductions were clear, stating the purpose and objectives almost every time. In one instance, he

missed the introduction entirely possibly because of administrative delays (sign-ins, various permission

slips, etc.) that ate in to the early minutes of the period. A note taking guide was distributed for every

class, focusing the students on key elements of the presentation.

Teacher A was an enthusiastic presenter. When dealing with students before the bell, his

demeanor was calm, relaxed, and attentive. When he began to present it was show time! He was

focused on communicating the material, drawing attention to key ideas and concepts and reinforcing

them with additional exhibits and historical pictures. They use of maps and first hand historical accounts

gave students better perspective. At times, he spoke very rapidly, never woodenly, and seemed to



regulate himself to slow down. They were clear demarcations between important segments and class

conclusions were clear. Lecture 4 had issues. This elective class was entitled “Society and Culture” and

the entire class was spent listening to an internet enabled radio program. Students were not engaged

and the lights were turned off. During this time, the teacher was engrossed in correcting papers and as

time went by, more students disengaged. This was not active teaching. I wondered if today’s students

are wired for radio listening.

Questions were posed at the appropriate times and served to assess class understanding.

Questions were coded for Teacher A and are shown in Table 5. Questioning techniques were solid, as

illustrated by coding. Types of questions were academic, requiring thoughtful reasoned responses about

50% of the time. Teacher A always used students’ first names and paused to allow questions to sink in.

Questions were presented in a matter of fact way. Challenging questions were not posed as often.

As a contrast to Teacher A, Teacher B utilized active teaching but in a hybrid way. Teacher B was

clearly the center of the class, combining a strong presence with group work and constructivist

principles. However, there were only two questions (see Table 5) asked in two classes. Teacher B’s

demonstrations are shown in Table 3. The group work in the first class set up the student presentations

for this same class on the second day. The students as a whole and within their subgroups functioned as

learning communities, with much student-student interaction. The approach contained elements of

constructivism but formulaic scaffolding tightly controlled the output coming from each group. Group

presentations had creative elements but were mostly uniform, and template driven. It is noteworthy

that within the groups, some individuals did not present or speak during group presentations. This

amounted to 20% of the class population. Participation by all should have been a group ground rule. An

opportunity was missed for developing student presentation skills.

Overall, this Teacher B’s approach had almost every student highly engaged in the activities of

the class.





Teacher B “Baker” Lecture number

1 2 Introduction A. States purpose or objectives + + B. Gives overview or advance organizer + + C. Distributes a study or note taking guide + + Body of Presentation D. Well prepared, speaks fluently + +

E. Projects enthusiasm for material + +

F. Maintains eye contact with students + +

G. Speaks at an appropriate pace and modulates voice

+ +

H. Uses appropriate expressions, movements, and gestures (rather than speaking woodenly) + +

I. Content is well structured and sequenced + +

J. New terms are clearly defined + +

K. Key concepts or terms are emphasized not just verbally

+ +

L. Includes appropriate analogies or examples + +

M. Facts distinguished from opinions + +

N. Presentations divided into segments with clear transitions and summaries

+ +

O. When necessary, questions students following each major segment, rather than waiting until end.

- -

P. Monitors student response, encouraging and responsive

- -

Conclusion

Q. Concludes with summary or integration of presentation

+ +

R. Invites student questions or comments - -

S. Follows up on the presentation by making a transition into activity or assignment that reinforces material learned.

Comments: Excellent lecturer. Few questions

+ +


Teacher C was observed for one class. This teacher did not have the experience of the previous

two teachers and conducted the class with both a presentation and group work. The group activity had



authentic and constructivist elements. Table 4 shows the checklist for this class. Questioning techniques

(Table 5) were weak and at times the teacher was off-task, and disorganized. Too many questions dealt

with procedural issues and some questions were presented as threats. An effective presentation of early

twentieth century photographs and a solid group activity was marred by ineffectiveness in classroom

and student management. This will be explored in guiding question #5.



Teacher C “Charlie” Lecture #

1 Introduction A. States purpose or objectives + B. Gives overview or advance organizer + C. Distributes a study or note taking guide + Body of Presentation D. Well prepared, speaks fluently - E. Projects enthusiasm for material + F. Maintains eye contact with students + G. Speaks at an appropriate pace and modulates

voice + H. Uses appropriate expressions, movements, and

gestures (rather than speaking woodenly) - I. Content is well structured and sequenced - J. New terms are clearly defined - K. Key concepts or terms are emphasized not just

verbally + L. Includes appropriate analogies or examples + M. Facts distinguished from opinions N. Presentations divided into segments with clear

transitions and summaries + O. When necessary, questions students following

each major segment, rather than waiting until end.

-

P. Monitors student response, encouraging and responsive -



Conclusion Q. Concludes with summary or integration of

presentation - R. Invites student questions or comments - S. Follows up on the presentation by making a

transition into activity or assignment that reinforces material learned.

Comments: Social Construction elements

+


Table 5: Questioning Techniques & Coding


Teacher A “Able” B “Baker” C “Charlie”

Behavior Categories (see below for explanation of codes, i.e. 1,2,3)

A. Type of Question Asked 1-16,2-17,3-1 1-2 1-1, 2-1, 3-3 B. Type of Response Required 1-17,2-15,3-2 2-2 1-1, 2-4 C. Selection of Respondent 1-17,2-10,3-2 3-2 1-3, 3-2 D. Pause (after asking question) 1-22,2-6,3-5 NA 1-3, 2-2 E. Tone and manner in presenting question 1-11,2-22,3-0 2-2 2-2, 3-3

Multiple Questions Repeats or rephrases questions before calling on anyone YES YES NO Asks two or more questions at the same time NO YES YES Do Students ask questions? NOT OFTEN NO YES Was there student to student interaction? How much? NO YES YES

Comments Teacher centered with no

group work

Teacher centered

with group work

Group work

Explanation of Codes

A. 1=Academic Question Factual, 2=Academic Question Opinion, 3=Non-academic, procedural B. 1= Reasoning response, 2=Factual Response, 3=Choice response Y/N, either/or C. 1= Names respondent before Question, 2=Calls on volunteer (after asking question), 3=Calls on non-

volunteer (after asking question) D. 1=Pauses before calling on student, 2=Did not pause, 3=NA: teacher names first E. 1= Question presented as challenge or simulation, 2=Question presented matter of factly, 3=Question

presented as threat or test Source: Classroom Observation Package Dates: 9/20/11 to 9/22/11

Classroom Management (Guiding question# 5)



Observing classroom management techniques required concentration on many subtleties. Many

of these procedures are established when the school year begins. In a highly organized classroom, these

processes are seamlessly woven into the functioning of the class.

Teacher B had the most well managed classroom with no procedural interruptions (See Table 6).

Students were very highly engaged and engrossed in the activities.

My observations of Teacher A uncovered very minor issues possibly because my

observation/contact time in his classes increased the probability of seeing more procedural and student

engagement issues (See Table 6). Teacher A did have engagement issues in some of his classes,

illustrated in Table 7.

Table 6: Classroom rules, routines, transitions and group management

Data derived from Forms 3.1 and 3.2

Teacher A “Able” B “Baker” C “Charlie”

Positive Prompt beginning of class YES YES NO Clear Instruction before, during, and after transitions YES YES NO Clear procedure for leaving seat YES YES NO Clear Classroom procedures and rules NO YES NO Clear assignment explanations and due dates YES YES YES Negative Preventable Delays (materials, technology, etc.) YES NO YES Distracting seating/traffic patterns NO NO NO Needless interruptions YES NO YES Assignment confusion NO NO NO

Comments Minor issues

Well managed Issues


Teacher C provided a marked contrast to the others by not applying solid class management

techniques. The class seemed to start off in a very chaotic fashion with 5 minutes spent collecting cell

phones. Class was interrupted by a poor transition from the beginning of class to the group activity. This

transition required excessive prompting. Instructions were often unclear, prompting a flurry of



questions from students that often degraded into Teacher C bantering with students, using sarcasm and

comments that belittled them. I can only surmise that the approach was to get on the same level with

the students so they could relate better. Despite these shortcomings, the assignment was authentic and

clear. All students were observed as engaged, with half the class engrossed in activities. It should be

noted that this was the only class I observed for Teacher C. This may not have been this teacher’s norm

but I surmise that the disrespectful bantering set a poor example in other classes as well.

I plan on using elements of both Teacher A’s and Teacher B’s approaches to active teaching and

group activities. Teacher B’s dynamism influenced the students to be just as active in their own learning

as his enthusiasm was in guiding them.

Student engagement in Teacher A’s classes had noteworthy characteristics, illustrated in Table

7. The most important failing in this area was that disengaged students were not stimulated for better

engagement. No attempts were made for those who were on task to engage them to an engrossed

level. Slight disruptive behaviors were let go, and did not escalate. This was an acceptable strategy. An

alarming example occurred during a segment where Teacher A’s students were listening to a radio

program with the lights out. Within five minutes, three students put their heads down on their desks to

rest. After fifteen minutes, six more students were resting—clearly disengaged from active listening and

note taking. This all went unnoticed by the teacher who was involved with paperwork.

Teacher C did not reinforce those engrossed or attempt to increase involvement for those on

task. However, no students were disengaged in Teacher C’s class (See Table 9). Teacher B both

recognized and reinforced student engagement during group work and group presentations. I observed

that this class achieved a very high level of engagement, bordering on all students being engrossed.

Table 7: Student Engagement Coding



Data derived from seating charts, engagement code data collection

Teacher A “Able” Lecture number

1 2 3 4 5 6 Observed Behaviors A. On-task and engrossed 4 2 2 4 B. On-task, at work but NOT engrossed 21 17 18 12 23 20 C. Off-task, quietly disengaged 5* 4* 0 9* 3 1 D. Off-task, disruptive 2 1 Action Codes E. R = Recognizes and reinforces * F. NR = Not recognized NR NR NR NR NR NR G. S = Stimulated for better engagement H. C = Corrected

Comments: Undesirable behaviors not recognized. Good behaviors not reinforced.




Teacher B “Baker” Lecture #

1 2 Observed Behaviors GW

*

A. On-task and engrossed All-R B. On-task, at work but NOT engrossed C. Off-task, quietly disengaged D. Off-task, disruptive Action Codes E. R = Recognizes and reinforces F. NR = Not recognized G. S = Stimulated for better engagement H. C = Corrected

Comments: *Lecture 1 Group work – all students engrossed






Teacher C “Charlie” Lecture #

1 Observed Behaviors A. On-task and engrossed 15 B. On-task, at work but NOT engrossed 15 C. Off-task, quietly disengaged D. Off-task, disruptive Action Codes E. R = Recognizes and reinforces F. NR = Not recognized 30 G. S = Stimulated for better engagement H. C = Corrected

Comments: Not recognized


Concluding Reflection

This field experience allowed me to witness, firsthand, the daily challenges of high school

teachers in a busy public school. The majority of my observations were positive and many techniques

and strategies are earmarked for my own future use in the classroom. What I found most thought

provoking was the constant need to be creative in engaging students. It is not realistic to achieve one

hundred percent engagement, although it should be the aim of every classroom teacher.

What became apparent during my observations was the amount of behind the scenes

preparation that takes place prior to stepping into the classroom. Many of the noted classroom

problems may have been prevented by employing Berliner’s executive functions, especially planning and

motivating. At times, questions seem spontaneous. However, they are carefully planned and designed to

add to all student’s understanding.

Teachers are in the position to become role models for their students. It was clear that students

respect and learn from those that exude credibility. By performing the artistry of teaching with the

insight and preparation of a thoughtful scientist, role models emerge. It is through this striving to get it

right that a teacher can have an impact. Such impact is the teacher’s most cherished reward.