Saturday 25 November 2017

Activity Two - Future-oriented Learning and Teaching

This week we are reflecting on how we have positively changed our practice during our postgraduate journey to address one of the themes or subthemes from the reading “Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching: A New Zealand perspective”. I chose Theme 4: "Changing the script": Rethinking learners' and teachers' roles.
  •   Why did I make this change?
Our students were working in groups co-operatively but not collaboratively. This meant that some students who always wanted to “work in a group or with a buddy” needed to be redirected by teachers to participate in the group work.
  • How was this change triggered during my learning journey at The Mind Lab?
Upon completing the Week Two session on 21st Century Learning Design, and Week Five on Growth Mindsets, it occurred to me what may be missing that would move our students from being just co-operative to collaborative.
  • Are there any theories or literature that support my change?
According to García-Valcárcel, Basilotta, & Salamanca, 2014, p. 66, “Collaborative learning encourages students to see situations from different perspectives, creates an environment where they can practice social and leadership skills (social benefits), and provides a satisfactory learning experience that significantly reduces anxiety (psychological benefits). ITL Research Innovative Teaching and Learning. (2012), wrote about students were working collaboratively when they were having a shared responsibility, made substantive decisions and the work was interdependent. To understand the students who appeared to be opting out of their learning,   Dweck, C. S. (2006)  spoke about “low effort syndrome” and how this presented as a student who was reluctant to participate in the learning because of their fixed mindset and reluctance to risk take. So when reading Kozar, O. (2010) it provided us with the understanding that the students require a diverse list of possible means to be able to contribute to a project that would afford them success and ability to draw on their strengths. We also discovered that to personalise the learning, students like to be able to make choices about learning tools (Buchem et al., 2014 as cited in Thibodeaux, Cummings, & Harapnuik, 2017, p. 3). This lead to us brainstorming to list all the possibilities our students could think of to use as learning tools both digital and analogue.  We also drew on Roblyer, M., Edwards, J., & Havurulik, M. (1997) who wrote about Vygotsky and his work on the Zone Of Proximal Development. For our students age and the stage they are at, it was prudent to scaffold this change so they are able to work in that sweet spot between gaining success and being given a challenge. After the process, we wanted the students to reflect on the success of both the end product and the process of working collaboratively. Spiller, D. (2009) Eventually it would be ideal to remove the scaffolding and for students to be knowingly working collaboratively.
  • What have I learned from implementing this change?
Working collaboratively for some student does not come naturally and can be emotionally and socially confronting. Some are still finding their strengths and getting to know themselves as learners. They all agree that they are able to produce a superior product for having worked collaboratively. It was a chance to bring the school values to life and to be actively operating in the learning environment. The reflective process needs to be used productively as a spiral, so the students are not starting from the beginning each time and have a chance to build upon their success in developing their collaborative skills.


References:

Dweck, C. S. (2006). The truth about ability and accomplishment. In Mindset: The new psychology of success (1st ed.). New York: Random House

ITL Research Innovative Teaching and Learning. (2012). 21st Century Learning Design Rubrics. Retrieved from Microsoft Partners In Learning website: https://education.microsoft.com/GetTrained/ITL-Research

García-Valcárcel, A., Basilotta, V., & Salamanca, C. L. (2014). ICT in Collaborative Learning in the Classrooms of Primary and Secondary Education. Communicar, 42(21), 65-74. Retrieved from https://www.revistacomunicar.com/

Kozar, O. (2010). Towards Better Group Work: Seeing the Difference between Cooperation and Collaboration. English Teaching Forum, 2010(2), 16-23. Retrieved from https://americanenglish.state.gov/files/ae/resource_files/forum_article_towards_better_groupwork_seeing_the_difference_between_cooperation_and_collaboration.pdf

Roblyer, M., Edwards, J., & Havurulik, M. (1997). Learning Theories and Integration Models. In Integrating educational technology into teaching (pp. 54-77). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Thibodeaux, T., Cummings, C., & Harapnuik, D. (2017). Factors that Contribute to ePortfolio Persistence. International Journal of ePortfolio, 7(1), 1-12. Retrieved from http://www.theijep.com

Spiller, D. (2009). Assessment Matters: Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment. Retrieved from Waikato University/Teaching Development Unit website: http://www.waikato.ac.nz/tdu/pdf/8_SelfPeerAssessment.pdf

Sunday 12 November 2017

Activity 1 - My Reflective Practice



In the past I have always felt too busy to be spending time to sit and formally reflect on my practice.
My formal reflective practice until reasonably recently has been as prescribed by factors such as our Teaching as Inquiry. Comparing my usual practice to  Zeichner and Liston's (cited in Finlay, 2008 Pg.7 ) five levels of reflection, I was using either:

Rapid reflection - immediate, ongoing and automatic action
Repair – decisions to make modifications in response to students’ cues
or
Review – thinking about or discussing some element of my teaching.

All these methods were internal and ongoing. 

It has only been in the past two and a half years when I have been involved in Post Graduate studies, that I have been involved in research and have had the insight to make use of:

Research – more systematic and sustained thinking over time, perhaps by collecting data or reading research.
Retheorizing and reformulating – critically examining my own practice and theories in the

My usual written reflection style is to use a PMI.

•    Trigger - Based on readings, viewings, professional development or teaching
•    What went well?
•    What was not working?
•    What other information is there? (readings, research)
•    Where to from here? or So What?
 A very descriptive method with lots of what, when, who and where and very little feelings and some thoughts about what is happening. But it was not only looking back and thinking about the event retrospectively, but there are ideas about how the ‘subject matter’ could be put into practice.

According to the reading (Finlay 2008) there needs to be more factors brought into a "self reflective" reflections such as “critically analysing and evaluating the actions and feelings associated with the experience, using theoretical perspectives;” (Finlay, 2008 Pg.7) So my PMI needs to be expanded to include how I was feeling at each stage. This was reinforced in the video Reflective Writing (2:23), they again talk about writing about not only your thoughts, but how you feel, the why, the how and so what. (University of Hull, 2014) The descriptive should be brief and the majority of the reflection should be about the thinking and feelings that were going on at the time.

After looking at the possible models for reflecting, I like the thought of something comprehensive and useful, but clean and easy to use so that regularly reflecting does not become burdensome. I like Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle:

•    Experience
•    What? (Reflection) Description
•    So What? (Analysis) Thoughts and feelings
•    Now What? (Planning) Action

I can incorporate all the elements of a good self-reflection as well as incorporating any data, research and readings to inform future actions.


References:

Finlay, L. (2009). Reflecting on reflective practice. PBPL. Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/opencetl/resources/pbpl-resources/finlay-l-2008-reflecting-reflective-practice-pbpl-paper-52

Non Formal Education Manual (Peace Corps). (1989). Theory: David Kolb: experiential learning cycle. Retrieved from http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=d-00000-00---off-0envl--00-0----0-10-0---0--- 

University of Hull. (2014, March 3). Reflective Writing [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=367&v=QoI67VeE3ds