This time we presented our own lesson plans. I haven't done a lesson plan before, so this was a worthwhile lesson to learn. I learnt that one should write different sections on a lesson plan, such as introduction, main section, and conclusion, and also have to allot time for giving homework. The duration of these different sections should be included in the plan. This exercise was useful, since now I already have one model of a lesson plan that I could use at work as a teacher (even though this first lesson plan is quite plain).
At the group work during the lesson I got some good, new ideas of what methods could be used when teaching about sustainable development. For example, I like the idea that students should go to companies to interview staff on sustainable development or other topic at hand. This kind of exercise encourages students to contact companies and thus form contacts to the world of work.
Moreover, this group work was quite interesting experience, since the group was new to me, and we compiled a presentation via Internet in 40 minutes. It was useful to learn about the possibilities of online learning for my own teaching work.
5.1 Group work results: Pedagogical methods for lesson planning, sustainable development as an example topic
- Interviews, research in companies about SD
- Reporting about own experiences of SD (at summer job, internship, etc.)
- Doing some concrete trials during the lesson, which show the impacts on diffferent themes of SD
- set up daily rules for working in terms of saving resources, e.g. using computer instead of printing out, recycling papers etc.
- Videos, good texts about SD with activating excercises
- reading companies' social responsibility reports as a group work
- find companies' SD presentations on web sites
- have training session for students to understand sustainable development
- training for staff to increase environmental consciousness at school
- build up regional, national, and global networks to share experiences
tiistai 4. maaliskuuta 2014
VOC 1: The fourth teaching session on the 29th of October: a chairperson's role
This time I worked as a chair, so I write here about things that I have learnt on the topics other groups presented.
4.1 Group Dynamics
One group taught about group dynamics. According to Tuckman´s model (1965), group development has four stages:
Source: Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 63 (6)
4.2 Good teaching according to students' ratings
Another group taught about students' expectations of teachers. Here is what the book Teaching Engineering (Wankat & Oreovicz) tells about that topic. Studies show that students include the following factors in good teaching (the most important factor is first) (Aubrecht 1979):
According to Teaching Engineering, students rate courses with more workload higher than courses with minimum workload. I find that surprising, but I think the reason to that is that students value that they learn more when there’s more work to do. Of course the workload shouldn’t be too vast, since then it would become frustrating.
Another list of the seven factors according to student ratings is given by Marsh (1984) (according to Wankat & Oreovicz):
Source: Wankat, P. C. & Oreovicz, F. S. Teaching Engineering. Chapter 16. Purdue University.
4.1 Group Dynamics
One group taught about group dynamics. According to Tuckman´s model (1965), group development has four stages:
- Forming
- Storming
- Norming
- Performing
Source: Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 63 (6)
4.2 Good teaching according to students' ratings
Another group taught about students' expectations of teachers. Here is what the book Teaching Engineering (Wankat & Oreovicz) tells about that topic. Studies show that students include the following factors in good teaching (the most important factor is first) (Aubrecht 1979):
- Skill: Interesting presentation, intellectual stimulation, clarity
- Rapport: Concern for students, classroom interaction
- Structure: Organization, course preparation
- Difficulty: Amount of work demanded
According to Teaching Engineering, students rate courses with more workload higher than courses with minimum workload. I find that surprising, but I think the reason to that is that students value that they learn more when there’s more work to do. Of course the workload shouldn’t be too vast, since then it would become frustrating.
Another list of the seven factors according to student ratings is given by Marsh (1984) (according to Wankat & Oreovicz):
- Learning and value: Challenge, subject interest, amount of material learned
- Enthusiasm: Interest, humor
- Organization: Objectives, clear explanation
- Group interaction
- Individual rapport: Provides help and answers questions
- Breadth of coverage
- Examinations and grading
Source: Wankat, P. C. & Oreovicz, F. S. Teaching Engineering. Chapter 16. Purdue University.
VOC 1: The third teaching session on the 16th of October: Student's self-evaluation
Self-evaluation is defined as students judging the quality of their work, based on evidence and explicit criteria, for the purpose of doing better work in the future.
3.1 A Four-Stage Model for Teaching Student Self-Evaluation
(by Center for Development and Learning)
STAGE 1: Involve students in defining the criteria, as it
STAGE 2: Teach students how to apply the criteria to their own work. When students are taught systematic self-evaluation procedures, the accuracy of their judgment improves.
STAGE 3: Give students feedback on their self-evaluations.
STAGE 4: Help students develop productive goals and action plans. Without teacher help, students may be uncertain whether they have attained their goals.
Three kinds of student benefits have been observed in the studies on students' self-evaluation:
Center for Development and Learning. Student self-evaluation: What reseach says and what practice shows, by Carol Rolheiser and John A. Ross. http://www.cdl.org/resource-library/articles/self_eval.php
3.2 Description of the teaching session
We had a padlet task with many questions for the students. It was nice, when they answered on different questions, but I found it difficult to discuss any larger the matters since I'm not (yet) an expert in education theories. And teaching via the Internet has its own challenges when you don't see the students.
At the end of the teaching session I forgot to ask students' comments on the topic since I noticed how late it was and only thought we need to hurry back to the common AC-room. So I stopped my presentation quite suddenly. Now when I'm thinking back to it I think we could have spent a couple of minutes more on conversation. Somebody may had something in mind that they would have like to say or ask. I'll try to be calmer next time when I'm winding up the teaching session! Despite these few difficulties, the whole experience of teaching alone was positive.
I learnt a good teaching method from another group's presentation when a teaching person asked questions from all the students individually by calling their names. That was an effective method to get everybody to speak, and something that I could use in my teaching. It's a good method especially when a teacher asks students' opinions or experiences, when basically everybody would have something to say, but they just don't participate actively for one reason or another. Some students may, for instance, be too self-critical and stay quiet since they think their experiences aren't anything special, but when a teacher asks them personally, it can be encouraging.
The process of planning this teaching session went the same way than last time. We used a progressing inquiry method in my group, so we decided the research questions as a group, then everybody searched for information on different topics, and at the end we put that all together. I think that process went fine and effectively.
3.3 The other groups' presentations
The main theme of this teaching session was ‘Evaluating learning and competences’. The group Piaget taught about portfolio and the group Dewey about assessment.
Assessment (the group Dewey)
Objectives are the starting point for assessment. John Biggs’ graphic below shows how to set up criterion-referenced objectives.
Portfolio as a Learning Tool (the group Piaget)
According the group’s presentation, portfolio is a process where the analysis of learning, development and advancement is as important as the final result. Campbell, Melenyzer, Nettles, and Wyman (2000) state that a portfolio must be organized, goal-driven, performance-based evidence that indicates the attainment of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
Different Types of Portfolio
- Basic Portfolio
- Showcase / Sample Portfolio
- Portfolio of Development and Learning
- Assessment Portfolio
- Digital portfolio
Source:
Campbell, Melenyzer, Nettles, & Wyman. 2000. Portfolio and Performance Assessment in Teacher Education
3.1 A Four-Stage Model for Teaching Student Self-Evaluation
(by Center for Development and Learning)
STAGE 1: Involve students in defining the criteria, as it
- increases student commitment to instructional goals
- enables teachers to help students set goals that are specific, immediate, and moderately difficult
- provides an opportunity to influence students' orientations toward learning.
STAGE 2: Teach students how to apply the criteria to their own work. When students are taught systematic self-evaluation procedures, the accuracy of their judgment improves.
STAGE 3: Give students feedback on their self-evaluations.
STAGE 4: Help students develop productive goals and action plans. Without teacher help, students may be uncertain whether they have attained their goals.
Three kinds of student benefits have been observed in the studies on students' self-evaluation:
- Students' narrative writing skills improve, when they learn how to evaluate their prose. The effects are strongest for the weakest writers, who are less certain about what constitutes good writing.
- Motivation increases: Students who are taught self-evaluation skills are more likely to persist on difficult tasks, be more confident about their ability, and take greater responsibility for their work.
- Students' attitudes toward evaluation become more positive when they participate in the process. As students grow older they become increasingly cynical about traditional testing. When self-evaluation is included as a contributor to their final grade, students are more likely to report that evaluation is fair and worthwhile.
Center for Development and Learning. Student self-evaluation: What reseach says and what practice shows, by Carol Rolheiser and John A. Ross. http://www.cdl.org/resource-library/articles/self_eval.php
3.2 Description of the teaching session
We had a padlet task with many questions for the students. It was nice, when they answered on different questions, but I found it difficult to discuss any larger the matters since I'm not (yet) an expert in education theories. And teaching via the Internet has its own challenges when you don't see the students.
At the end of the teaching session I forgot to ask students' comments on the topic since I noticed how late it was and only thought we need to hurry back to the common AC-room. So I stopped my presentation quite suddenly. Now when I'm thinking back to it I think we could have spent a couple of minutes more on conversation. Somebody may had something in mind that they would have like to say or ask. I'll try to be calmer next time when I'm winding up the teaching session! Despite these few difficulties, the whole experience of teaching alone was positive.
I learnt a good teaching method from another group's presentation when a teaching person asked questions from all the students individually by calling their names. That was an effective method to get everybody to speak, and something that I could use in my teaching. It's a good method especially when a teacher asks students' opinions or experiences, when basically everybody would have something to say, but they just don't participate actively for one reason or another. Some students may, for instance, be too self-critical and stay quiet since they think their experiences aren't anything special, but when a teacher asks them personally, it can be encouraging.
The process of planning this teaching session went the same way than last time. We used a progressing inquiry method in my group, so we decided the research questions as a group, then everybody searched for information on different topics, and at the end we put that all together. I think that process went fine and effectively.
3.3 The other groups' presentations
The main theme of this teaching session was ‘Evaluating learning and competences’. The group Piaget taught about portfolio and the group Dewey about assessment.
Assessment (the group Dewey)
Objectives are the starting point for assessment. John Biggs’ graphic below shows how to set up criterion-referenced objectives.
Portfolio as a Learning Tool (the group Piaget)
According the group’s presentation, portfolio is a process where the analysis of learning, development and advancement is as important as the final result. Campbell, Melenyzer, Nettles, and Wyman (2000) state that a portfolio must be organized, goal-driven, performance-based evidence that indicates the attainment of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
Different Types of Portfolio
- Basic Portfolio
- Showcase / Sample Portfolio
- Portfolio of Development and Learning
- Assessment Portfolio
- Digital portfolio
Source:
Campbell, Melenyzer, Nettles, & Wyman. 2000. Portfolio and Performance Assessment in Teacher Education
Tilaa:
Blogitekstit (Atom)