Monday, April 27, 2015

Do you "walk the talk"?



p.67. “…students often say that such teachers ‘walk the talk’.” (Brookfield, 2006)
Objective:
            In the fourth chapter of his book The Skillful Teacher, Brookfield explores a wide range of characteristics of what students value in teachers. A teacher is perceived as being effective when he/she combines credibility and authenticity in teaching. Credible teachers have something important that students can learn from. Authenticity is defined as the perception that the teacher stays open and honest in his/her attempts to help students to learn. Students view authenticity as more than just being helpful. It is also seen as being trustworthy. “Students say that such teachers ‘walk the talk’, and ‘practice what they preach’”. Four specific indicators of authenticity are mentioned (Brookfield, 2006): (1) congruence between words and actions (2) full disclosure of criteria, expectation agenda and assumptions that guide teacher’s practice (3) responsiveness of student learning (4) personhood that teachers are seen as real people moved by enthusiasm or dislikes. Brookfield emphasizes that this kind of autobiographical disclosure can be done for the cause of supporting student learning.
Reflective:
            When discussing student evaluation with colleagues, I have often heard our students comment on things such as “he/she is very kind and approachable”, “he/she responds to emails quickly”, and “the standards are high but transparent and achievable”. It appears that students do not only perceive teachers in terms of how well-structured our class is, how thoughtful the lesson plan is, or even not much of how knowledgeable we are. To some extent they would rather evaluate teachers as a person, and how capable and willing we are to help them learn. Teaching is not a popularity competition but skillful teachers understand the value of positive relationships with students. Personal authenticity helps minimize disruptive classroom behaviors, improve student engagement, increase student motivation and create a positive learning environment where everyone feels comfortable sharing their opinions. The quote reminds me of my own experience as a student. I often put more effort into a course taught by a teacher that I respected as an honest and trustworthy person. To build on the authenticity as perceived by students the first thing we need to assure is to always keep our words and do what we ask our students to do.
Interpretive:
            Walk the talk literally means to put your words into actual actions. It is a rather simple but effective student engagement strategy. If a clinical lab instructor doesn’t obey safety rules herself, how could she expect her students to follow safety instructions in their practice? It applies to what we promise in changes in curriculum and classroom activities. When we inform students certain changes will be made according to their suggestions, students expect to see actual influence (Keys, 2006). Whether or not a teacher “walks the talk” affects the levels of openness and trust between the teacher and students. Learners reported that they usually experience more affective learning and motivation with a highly immediate and responsible teacher. (Pogue & Ahyun, 2006)


Decisional:
            The most effective approach that has improved my teaching skills is to become a learner myself. Taking PID program allows me to re-evaluate my learning and teaching decisions from a learner’s perspective. I came to understand the struggle to find innovative ideas, the hard work that I have to put in to complete an assignments and the joy of finally achieving the goals. I shared my learning experience with my students – how I overcome all the barriers in learning, how I deal with my own resistance of changes and how I keep myself motivated. Coming from a nonnative background, I will have to make additional effort to improve authenticity and credibility. In my future teaching practice, I will continue to build on authenticity and credibility. When I ask for professionally formatted report with minimum grammar and spelling errors, I should make sure I also follow the standard in course materials and written grading feedback. While setting high academic standards and expectations upon my students, I should regulate my actions to meet these standards at the same time. Actions always speak louder than words. While the ongoing professional development has extended my knowledge and skills in teaching, now I need to make sure I get to implement these positive changes into my actual teaching practice. Journal entries have helped me decide what can be done in the future. If walking the talk means to act the talk, I will first consciously consider what I can do, in what sequence gradually, and when I can possibly get it done then inform students a realistic decision.

Bibliography

Brookfield, S. (2006). The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, B. (2015). Teaching style vs learning style, myth and realities. Retrieved from http://www.cete.org/acve
Corno, L. (2008). On teaching adaptively. Educational Psychologist, 43(3).
Fisher, D. F. (2008). Content-Area Conversations: Chapter 1. Why Talk Is Important in Classrooms. Retrieved from ASCD: http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/108035/chapters/Why-Talk-Is-Important-in-Classrooms.aspx
Fisher, D., Rothenberg, C., & Frey, N. (2008). Content-are Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-based lessons for Diverse Language Learners. ASCD.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligence: the theory in practice. Basic Books.
Keys, P. (2006). Are teachers walking the walk or just talking the talk in science education? Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 11(5).
Oblinger, D. (2005). Educating the net generation. Retrieved from Educause: http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen
Pogue, L., & Ahyun, K. (2006). The Effect of Teacher Nonverbal Immediacy and Credibility on Student Motivation and Affective Learning. Communication Education, 55(3).
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Week, E. (2013, Janurary). Student Engagement Drops by Grade. Retrieved from Gallup Poll Report: http://www.gallup.com/


Saturday, April 25, 2015

Student Talk vs Teacher Talk



p.167, “If the teacher does all the talking, then the need for students to think or to take responsibility for their own meaning-making, understanding and learning recedes” (Brookfield, 2006)
Objective:
            In the ninth chapter of The Skillful Teacher, Brookfield states that diversity is a perplexing reality in contemporary American higher education. It is reflected in learner’s academic abilities, personalities, learning styles and cultural backgrounds. He suggests several approaches to develop informal measures of students’ diversity using Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ). Brookfield also outlines a number of responses teachers can make in a diverse classroom, such as team teaching, mixing student groups and mixing modalities. Switching from teacher talk to student talk is one of the effective approach when we encounter a diverse classroom.
            Teacher talk is necessary in a way to establish credibility and authenticity. Student talk is crucial to deeply engage students in learning. Letting students talk also provides valuable information of how well learners have progressed. It is a democratic need allowing students to express their opinions in the classroom that are respected by the teacher. Students then become more responsible for their own meaning-making, understanding and learning.

Reflective:
            Effective teacher creates a learning environment that engage active learning. I used to start my class from a brief overview of the learning objectives, lab activities and essential questions that they will need to keep in mind for hands-on practice. A couple of students took notes while the most of class were just sitting there, looking at me and listening. Not surprisingly students came up with questions that they could have answered themselves if they “listened”. “Did they pay attention?” I asked myself, “seems like so, but why didn’t they learn?” This quote has answered my question by stating the undeniable importance of student engagement. If it was only me talking and telling students what to do, there is very limited cognitive stimulus to students that urge them to think and take initiatives of learning. Teacher talk may have helped some learners to remember the materials, but not much help of applying and synthesizing new knowledge.
Interpretive:
            Research shows that student engagement is one of the most critical non-cognitive factors correlated with student learning (Week, 2013). The importance of active learning has its root in constructivism theory. Constructivists believe that learner is the center of learning. Learning occurs when learners construct knowledge and new meaning based on their real world experience and prior knowledge. Eventually learners need to use the knowledge and make sense of the world. Although lecturing (teacher talk) has its advantage in terms of information delivery and modeling thinking process, instruction should not exclusively rely on teacher’s monologue.    Speaking permits learners to pay attention to the content, organize their thoughts, summarize main ideas and then translate their direct feeling to new learning (Fisher D. F., 2008). To some extent speech is a representation of thinking – it is how we process information, remember and synthesize new meaning. Student talk is thus an irreplaceable practice in subjects like English, Sociology, History, Arts and many more where personal opinions matter. The ability to express oneself coherently and to communicate clearly and comfortably with others will increase essential skills in reading, writing and comprehension. As communication skills are progressively more crucial in today’s workplace, allowing student to talk is not only a teaching practice but a practical requirement of authentic assessment.
Decisional:  
            Recognizing the significance of student engagement in the classroom, I am going to integrate the following components into my future teaching practice: 1) use visual displays for analyzing 2) create activities where students can have more interaction with the content, and with each other 3) use up-to-date real world examples in teaching. As for student talk although I always encourage student talk in the classroom, it is relatively restricted to the purpose of checking their comprehension instead of critical thinking. My past practice was like: teacher initiates a question – student responds to the question – teacher evaluates learning. This cycle hardly has any dialogue that expands the conversation to a deep level. Another limitation of this cycle is that only a few students have the opportunity to talk with the majority of the class still not involved. In an effort to alter the ratio of teacher and student talk I am going to start from teacher modeling (teachers model behaviors, skills and strategies expected from students). This should be based on pre-established purposes of learning (Fisher, Rothenberg, & Frey, 2008). I will strive to connect the content to issues students are facing outside of the classroom. In my teacher modeling, I will demonstrate how I activate background knowledge and prior learning in order to construct a networked knowledge structure.
            As stated earlier student talk needs to be purposeful and meaningful. It requires full considerations of the learning outcomes in lesson plan when integrating student talk into instructional routines. Once students are comfortable with the approach from teacher’s modeling, I will let students use “student talk time” to ask questions. At this stage students are more comfortable of talking in the classroom to clarify understanding and provide feedback. Student talk doesn’t have to be solo talk. Group tasks are designed to let students work together, discuss tasks, exchange ideas and negotiate meanings. At the same time I will monitor and facilitate group discussions instead of being the dominant speaker. Student talk is critical and reflective at this stage.
            When students use academic language to make their ideas comprehensible to their peers, they are taking responsibility of learning. The last stage of student talk is individual presentation. Individual student works on a project independently and reports learning to the class. I am considering adding a presentation assignment in the assessment plan that each student chooses a relevant topic and shares their research findings and insights in a ten-minute presentation. In larger classroom setting this approach can still be applied as video-taped presentations.
            To conclude, student talk pays a significant role in learning initiatives, ownership, student engagement and deep learning. The integration of student talk should be done step-by-step through purposeful planning based on clear learning outcomes.

Bibliography

Brookfield, S. (2006). The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, B. (2015). Teaching style vs learning style, myth and realities. Retrieved from http://www.cete.org/acve
Corno, L. (2008). On teaching adaptively. Educational Psychologist, 43(3).
Fisher, D. F. (2008). Content-Area Conversations: Chapter 1. Why Talk Is Important in Classrooms. Retrieved from ASCD: http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/108035/chapters/Why-Talk-Is-Important-in-Classrooms.aspx
Fisher, D., Rothenberg, C., & Frey, N. (2008). Content-are Conversations: How to Plan Discussion-based lessons for Diverse Language Learners. ASCD.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligence: the theory in practice. Basic Books.
Oblinger, D. (2005). Educating the net generation. Retrieved from Educause: http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Week, E. (2013, Janurary). Student Engagement Drops by Grade. Retrieved from Gallup Poll Report: http://www.gallup.com/


Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Formative Questionnaire Design and Rationale


CHE142 Mid-Course Questionnaire

Dear CHE142 Student,
Congratulations! After several weeks of hard work, you have achieved many learning goals of the course and acquired new skill sets for your future career. Before we begin the second half of the semester, please take a moment to reflect on how you feel the course is going. Your feedback will allow me to customize the course content and adjust my instructions to meet your learning needs. Thank you.
Your CHE142 Instructor Tanya Tan
Please use the back of the page if you need additional space.
1. The topics that I have understood the best are:





2. The topics that I need further information or clarification are:





3. In terms of how the course materials are organized on Blackboard site, the aspects that I find the most helpful are: 





4. In terms of how the course materials are organized on Blackboard site, the improvements that I would like to see are:




5. The best aspects that I find in this course are:




6. I feel some aspects that could have been strengthened, such as:




7. The best aspects of the instructor’s teaching are:




8. The instructor will be more helpful if she/he can:




9. Additional comments for the course and/or the instructor:



(Optional) If you would like an individual follow-up from your instructor, you may write down your name below. (Otherwise, this questionnaire is completely anonymous.) Your instructor will contact you in 3-5 business days. Note this is optional.  _______________________________

Rationale

Formatting

The questionnaire is properly and professionally formatted:
·       12 pt. font with a standard font style Times New Roman that is consistently used in all other course materials
·       Standard margins with adequate amount of white space offering high readability and sufficient non-white space for information delivery
·       Pages numbered with descriptive header and last edited date[1]
·       All entries are numbered with sufficient lined room for comments. Instruction is clear that students can use the back of the page when additional space is needed.

Directions

Both written and verbal directions will be given. The directions are written in plain language, and revised to achieve the best clarity[2]. A first-person point of view is used in the questionnaire. The questionnaire thus holds a more personal, subjective, and natural tone of voice. It also allows the participant to directly recall their experience, personal thoughts, emotions and opinions in a natural way. The direction is comprehensive in a way that clearly communicates the purpose of the evaluation to the students (“Your feedback will allow me to customize the course content and adjust my instructions to meet your learning needs.”). It also acknowledges student’s learning and promotes reflective thinking. At the end of the questionnaire, students are given options to leave their names if they require individual follow-up. By doing so, instructors can reach out to solve more individual concerns that are not suitable to be addressed as a class.

Questions and Statements

               The questionnaire organizes questions in the following categories:
o   Student’s mastery level of course content: Question 1-2
o   LMS course site organization: Question 3-4
o   Student’s satisfaction: Question 5-6
o   Instructor’s Teaching: Question 7-8
o   Additional Comments: Question 9
Although the name of the category isn’t explicitly written as a subheading, it is apparent that all questions appear in pairs that inquire both positive and negative side of the same aspect. These categories of high concern provide me critical evidence to consider before the second half of the semester. Students can readily see the relevance of the questions, and are able to answer the questions. Questions are phrased in rather plain and clear language instead of obsolete terms. 
The purpose of this formative questionnaire is to spot check on learner’s progress and ask for individual student’s ideas, suggestions, and observations instead of numerical ratings. The class sizes range from 15-20 students which allows me to read every single word that the student has to say. If in the future, a formative questionnaire is collected from much larger class size, I will incorporate a proper evaluation scales for timely statistical analysis, and only provide 1-2 comment boxes for additional descriptive non-numerical comments.

Response fields

            As stated before, purpose of this formative questionnaire is to collect non-numerical information from the learner, check individual learner’s progress and understanding in a small-class setting. Comment areas are provided instead of numerical rating scale. Before implementing the questionnaire, I will also make the point clear that the more specific their comments are, the more accurately I can determine the next steps to take. Verbal and written directions also encourage students to use the back of the page as additional space. Analysis of the results of questionnaire require increasing time and effort. Bias and misinterpretation could occur.

Purpose

Skillful teaching is what helps students learn (Brookfield, 2006). Effective instruction is what helps students to learn in a more effective way that brings in changes in knowledge, skill set and mind set. To achieve instructional effectiveness, both instructors and students need to develop a clear understanding of learning outcomes and frequently examine progress. The first two questions (topics that students understand the best, and topics students need further clarification) focus on this characteristic of instructional effectiveness. They reveal how learners feel about knowledge acquisition. Consecutive instructions become directional to help students achieve the unaccomplished learning outcomes.
As a blended course, usability and ease of navigation are important evaluands, especially when a learning management system is new to learners (e.g. freshmen students). Failure to locate information drastically hinders learning. Hence, question 3 and 4 are designed to survey student’s user experience of the Blackboard site. In the first two weeks, I often ask students whether they feel comfortable to obtain information from Blackboard site. I also demonstrate how materials are organized online. In the midpoint of the semester, I am also interested in how comfortable students are with the online portion of the course.
Question 5 and 6 are where students address their feelings. They are more of a general inquiry of student’s satisfaction. Effective instruction requires meaningful student-student, student-faculty and student-content interaction. Students’ satisfactions level is critical information to assess instruction effectiveness. 
Question 7 and 8 evaluate instructor’s teaching strategies and quality of presentation. The five main competency area for instructors include: professional foundations, planning and preparation, instructional methods and strategies, assessment and evaluation, and management (The International Board of Standards for Training, 2003). For online and blended course instructors, online teaching competencies emphasize on technical skills and skills needed to facilitate online discussion. Online instructor's competencies involve[3] (Spector, 2001)
·        Allowing learners time for reflection
  • Keeping discussions alive and on a productive path
  • Archiving and organizing discussions to be used in subsequent lessons
  • Animating discussions and displaying cultural sensitivity
Patti (2004) summarized additional online instructor's competencies. These are also relevant to blended course instructors.
  • Administrative - to assure smooth course operation and reduce overload
  • Designing - to assure adequate eLearning outcomes and satisfaction
  • Facilitation - to provide social benefits and enhance learning
  • Evaluation - to assure that learners know how they are evaluated; and help learners meet the course objectives
  • Technical - assure overcome barriers due to technical components
When implementing the questionnaire, I will lead the students to carefully recall their feelings to presentations, designed activities, and assessment. As a formative questionnaire, question 7 and 8 are phrased rather general to let the students express what they like and dislike. In all five main areas for instructor competency (The International Board of Standards for Training, 2003), students are both participants and observers who can often pinpoint what has been done properly, and what hasn’t. For example, it is difficult for the instructor to find a misalignment between assessment and instruction when everything appears to be “natural” to us. As a novice learner, they may come in with no prior knowledge in a certain field – all they know is what has been taught. This makes their responses valuable input.  

Implementation and Review of Results

The original version of the questionnaire was implemented in the classroom two weeks ago. I chose the class that I have the least materials to teach, and gave students 20 minutes to complete the questionnaire. I announced the purpose of the questionnaire and explained directions (such as specific comments, things and experience to reflect on). I also made the point clear that they do not have to answer all the questions; however, anything that they would like to say will be thoughtfully examined and greatly appreciated. I also informed the students when they could expect hearing back from me regarding the results of the questionnaire. A volunteer was chosen from the students to administrate the entire process when I stayed outside of the classroom.
65 complete questionnaires from four sections were collected. Within each section, similar results were grouped and responded together. My response is created in a personal and friendly tone that articulates the following:
·        Acknowledgement of student’s progress
·        Appreciation of suggestions and comments
·        Changes that I decide to make
·        Changes that I am not able to implement, why and what alternate solution is
The next week, I let the students vote how they would like to know my answers, either communicated verbally, or posting the questionnaire and my answer on the wall so everyone can look at, or posting a summary on Blackboard that they can view online afterwards. The vote was quickly administrated by a volunteer. All the students are more comfortable with an open wall of questionnaire and responses. I kept onymous questionnaire not published (students can choose to leave their name on the questionnaire if they require individual follow-up), and then offered sufficient time for students to read the questionnaire and my feedback. It appeared to be a favored approach as I already grouped the similar questionnaire results. Confidentiality issue was one of my concerns, so I let the students decide how they would like to know the results.  
Learners often report a feeling of impostership – they lack the intelligence and talent to succeed. A way to deal with this impostership is to make this phenomenon public (Brookfield, 2006). By publishing the questionnaire results, it is potentially useful to let imposter-feeling students know that they are not alone. There are common difficult topics that many of the students struggle with. I let them know specific studying advice, and what I plan to do to help them overcome the barriers. Three out of sixty-five students wrote their names on the questionnaire requesting a confidential follow-up. I emailed them and scheduled meeting time within the time that I promised.
I am also planning on sharing the questionnaire results, my interpretation and responses to my mentor. I would also seek advice and sharing of his teaching experience in the previous years. In the future, I will conduct a pilot test with students and revise questions accordingly before large scale implementation.

References

Brookfield, S. (2006). The skillful teacher: on technique, trust and responsiveness in the classroom, 2nd Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Shank, P. (2004).  Competencies for Online Instructor. Retrieved from http://m.kettering.edu/sites/default/files/resource-file-download/CompetenciesOnlineInstructors.pdf
Spector, J. M. (2001). Competencies for online teaching. ERIC Digest, 1-11.
The International Board of Standards for Training, P. a. (2003). Instructor Competencies. Retrieved from http://www.ibstpi.org


[1] Part A Questionnaire is incorporated in this assignment with the original header removed.
[2] The author greatly appreciate revision suggestions from PIDP3260 classmates Laura Lotzer, Tanya Allen, Andrea Kettering and Martha Yu. 
[3] As posted in Moodle discussion