7 posts tagged “conference”

Image source

Lisa began by discussing the quote: “The classroom, with all its limitations, remains a location of possibility" (Bell Hooks, 1994, p. 207), and then went on by looking at the notion of excellence in tertiary teaching, referring back to the main theme of the conference. She asked how we can bring student evaluation of teaching into our teaching institutions, and teaching practice. We have clear empirical methods to research outputs; the push for this empirical data then moves to the evaluation of tertiary teaching. How do we measure excellence in teaching. Lisa listed 1) retention, 2) success rates, 3) student evaluation, 4) compliance measures, 5) willingness to engage with new technologies, 6) willingness to show commitment to teaching by engaging in PD, and 6) by willingness to disseminate good practice (e.g. by publishing in academic journals). She then went on to discuss who wants to measure excellent, including the teacher (especially for career development), the institution, political bodies (to measure value for money), and others such as Ako Aotearoa (for example there may be a desire to raise the profile of teaching within the tertiary sector).

Emerson reflected on some experiences she had working with award winning teachers, who were incredibly humble about their teaching practice. She then went on to unpack the following: “It is crucial that we challenge any feeling of shame or embarrassment that teachers who do their job well….For when we hide our light we collude in the overall cultural devaluation of our teaching vocation” (Bell Hooks).

Image source

The session included an interactive exercise that involved participation from the audience. As we went in we were given a pen and a piece of A4 paper with the words Why?, How?, A moment, and A model/metaphor on them as headings at equal intervals down the page. At the appropriate moment, Lisa asked the audience to look at the first question, gave some background behind it (why do you teach and what do you hope your learners will be able to do), and then each person wrote down their response to the question. The top of the paper was then turned over, and the audience had to swap papers with someone close by. This process was completed for the rest of the sections, swapping papers with people around the room after each one was completed. It was a really effective exercise as not only were the audience engaged and active, but it personalised the topic and the issues for them. To complete the exercise, 50% of the audience (in groups of 3) considered question 1 and selected 1 response that they felt resonated with them; 50% of the audience (in groups of 3) did the same for question 4. The microphone was finally circulated, with a nominated speaker reading out each group’s selection.

Examples of answers (all anonymous) on the sheet that I came away with were 1) Why? “I want my student to have the ability to survive the future”; 2) How? “One thing I do well is detailed instructions”; 3) A moment (of success) “Working with a group of Maori nursing students and having them tell me about the concept of Waiora, mindmapping what they shared on the board and offering it back to them as a structure for their presentation. Tutor as learner/learner as tutor.”; 4) A model/metaphor (for learning and teaching) “Reciprocal learners about life”.

I felt it was a shared reflective activity that appeared to work well. Each person had a ‘voice’ and had the opportunity to contribute to the discussion (although some people chose to opt out). Judging from the responses, people invested time and effort to respond meaningfully. The activity is one I will certainly use in Professional Development sessions with academic faculty, as well as at conferences when I present in the future!

Lisa summed up the exercise by revisiting the questions Why?, How?, A moment, and A model/metaphor. The second and third questions were designed to help celebrate who we are – to help us revalue our profession. At the heart of teaching is the relationship between a student, a teacher and a subject and this is where the models and metaphors are so useful. She suggests that metaphors do not describe reality, but that they create it. The image of the learner as consumer places the learner as passive, as a receiver…also, as a customer, the learner knows what they want, and that they are always right. Also, the metaphor suggests that the institution is the ‘shop’, and the person who sells the product rarely evaluates how the customer uses their purchase.

Other models that Lisa has collected from her other meetings, included co-learner, facilitator, mediators, mentors, guides, colleagues with a serious duty to care, and a co-traveller who sees things that otherwise the learner may miss. She argued that the whole dynamic between teachers and learners would change if the metaphor of consumer were abandoned and replaced with an alternative. The challenge is how this can be opened up for discussion in institutions, and unpicked with students, so that the customer model is left behind.

One analogy that a group of us discussed after Lisa’s session was that of a greenhouse (extending something that someone had written in the session about a teacher as gardener). We felt that the greenhouse idea included the notion of planting seeds, growth happening within each individual seedling, and the learning environment being safe (protecting from frosts), nurturing (the right balance of warmth and moisture, that is constantly monitored). It also allowed for differences (tomatoes not being the same as melons), and the notion that the seedling will eventually be transplanted to the outside world. Could be maybe stretching an analogy to breaking point and beyond, but it does focus on the fact that the teacher cannot do the growing for the learner, and that the learner has to be actively involved in the process.

This was a paper Vickel Narayan and I presented at the eFest meets Teaching & Learning conference, UCOL 2009. It was an interesting experience at a vibrant conference. A time for firsts, it was Vickel's first time to present and write an academic paper for a conference, and it was the first time that we had written and presented together. I felt that we both learned a lot on the way, from each other, from the feedback we gathered from the audience (see below), and from reflecting on how well it went on the day.

It was an interesting audience, and it was great to have much more of a discussion underway throughout the session. There appeared to be a lot of sharing of experiences, strategies, and problems faced, which saw the audience fully engaged. Throughout the session there was also a couple of people Tweeting about main points, and I found this was a great way, afterwards to see how people had interpreted what had been said, and what they saw as central points. It was also great to find out, for example, that the mindmap I had made building on previous work I'd done in 2006, was in fact useful and did illustrate some key factors behind why learners plagiarise.

All in all, judging from the comments, the discussion, and the feedback, I think the audience went away with some new ideas and approaches, as well as affirmation that they 'not alone'! :-)

To access the accompanying handout: http://www.scribd.com/full/20133056?access_key=key-2kh798rentwwpywxfd9l

To access the full paper: http://www.scribd.com/full/18077894?access_key=key-2d8r0452hsbwlgdffwx7

Feedback

• Excellent; general overview; positive approach to manage plagiarism
• Session was great. Just enough time to have our discussion!
• Liked the suggestion: getting students to have constructive dialogue about plagiarism
• Love the handout w the links. Thanks heaps. T
• I enjoyed the session but needs longer time for discussion
• Plagiarism is a lot more than I realised
• Important - see a way to move from punitive to formative
• "Use a free tool for formative use" - this was a new idea for me! Thanks for all the links - I will use
• Good to see Turnitin as a formative tool rather than punitive
  
• Turnitin as a tool - not the answer
• Thanks for the references
• Cultural issues seem to be the main factor but I value the deterrence factor and want to improve arguments

Please cite as: Owen, H., & Narayan, V. (2009, 29 Sept - 01 Oct). Pedagogy, Policing or Preventing Plagiarism? Experiences with facilitating Professional Development and Turnitin. Paper presented at the Teaching excellence - excellence in teaching: Teaching and Learning Conference Meets eFest 2009, Universal College of Learning (UCOL), Palmerston North.

eFest meets Teaching and Learning Conference 2009

The “The Web: End of the classroom era?” debate today at the eFest meets Teaching and Learning Conference, was well-attended. Initially the rules around the debate were established: panel of 6 people, 3 affirmative (in agreement with the statement) and 3 negative (in disagreement with the statement). Both panels were seated on the stage. The audience and a red and green voting paper. There was an adjudicator and a timekeeper. Each panel had 3 minutes each to speak.

The first speaker was from the affirmative team, and began by giving some statistics around online learning. Learners in online courses spend more time on task than in purely face-to-face contexts, and achievement of learning outcomes is higher. The second speaker from the panel in disagreement, responded by coming from the ‘human’ aspect – human teachers for human learning. It was interesting that face-to-face was seen as a positive approach for emotive factors, and being able to ‘see’ where learners were at, and what they were feeling. There appeared to be no understanding around the range of tools that can facilitate these same factors, the fact that somehow face-to-face learning is better – that there is no boredom, more engagement, more opportunities to contribute. Joyce was quick to challenge these ideas, pointing out that in face online it can be more democratic, that more learners have a voice, can create an identity. She recommends the You Tube video: Mr Winkle awakes. The Internet releases the teacher from the information transfer model and frees them up to debate.

The next speaker did not rebut any of the previous points, saying that she felt nothing had been said that needed to be rebutted! She feels that the Internet caters for the trivial, and referred to Andy Warhole’s 10 minutes of fame. The Web lets inadequate, foolish people express their thoughts, and the Web can deceive. You can’t trust the Web and there are perils and traps for young players. The next affirmative speaker chose to rebut the previous speaker’s points. He pointed that Ivan Illich foresaw the Internet. Schools and classrooms are industrial strength learning and that this is not the sort of learning we need. He quotes Illich’s book around conviviality. Learners are reliant on teachers and the system that makes education work. Learning is what happens on the Internet, and that will usher in the post-industrial age.

The final person from the disagreement panel, Colin Cox made a comment about the fact that he had not heard the previous speaker as he was Tweeting. He than gave an overview of his flight from Auckland to Palmerston North, pointing out that pilots who had learned in a simulated environment would not have the skills to really fly a plane.

Next stage was to throw things open things open to the audience for questions and comments. The first person from the audience made the point that simulators have been used to train medical professionals and pilots for years; that dentists were being trained in second life. The rebuttal made the point that the classroom is as big as the world – which played directly into Joyce’s hands – who pointed to the title of the debate!!

A question from the audience asked why eFest took place in a classroom on Tuesday. It was argued that eFest in fact had started months before in wikis, through Twitter, in Skype meetings – in a collaborative, globally diverse participants. The one laptop per child initiative enables children to connect to each other, even if they are not able to connect to the Internet.

One of the audience pointed out that she felt nervous about contributing to the discussion, but if she were online she would be able to contribute more comfortably. She poses the question – are teachers motivated by popularity, and their ‘ego’, when students appear to ‘love’ them?

A final comment from the audience pointed out that he could’t imagine his kids picking up the skills they currently have in an online environment…like kicking a ball.

A final vote from the audience was requested after a  humorous summary of the main points made in the debate. It was a close call. The adjudicator declared the debate a draw given the quality of the debate and the spirit behind it!!!

I heard the people behind me say that it had been the best part of the conference. It certainly provoked passionate responses that showed the depth of commitment and feeling educators invest in their ‘calling’.

eFest meets Teaching and Learning Conference 2009

“If people knew how hard I had to work to gain my mastery, it would not seem so wonderful at all” Michelangelo

This post describes a session given by Colin Cox at the eFest meets Teaching and Learning 2009 on October 1st 2009. It focussed on talent, motivation and myelin! It posed the questions: do you do what you do because you have natural talent? Mystery about how to people have talent, what is it, and where does it come from?

A session that explored what the components that make talent and how you ‘grow’ talent. It was a quite interactive session, which involved for example speaking to the person sitting next to you and asking what they felt talent is, and then collecting some of the responses from the audience verbally. Only about 30 seconds per question was given, but the replies indicated that it was just long enough for people to formulate ideas and replies. The answers indicated quite a cross-section of opinions around the subject of talent, its source, and how/if it can be enhanced. Some key ways that were seen as effective ways of enhancing the potential of learners in education, including coaching, self-belief, practice, mentoring, commitment, opportunity.

Some examples of people with talent were Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Jerry Rice, Shane Cameron, and this then moved to a discussion of ‘nature or nurture’. If it isn’t nature then the conclusion was that it would exclude a lot of people. The question was also raised about excellence or mastery in any endeavour and if it was about innate talent, IQ, memory, physical prowess, motivation, practice or a combination.

The example of Tiger Woods was unpicked, and the notion of the fact it was hard work and role models that made the difference as opposed to genetics (although genetic potential does determine height, weight, and muscle mass). By his first major competition at the age of 17 he had already been practising golf since he was 1 ½ years of age.

The next area that was explored was short-term memory (cited the 1978 Carnegie Mellon University study). Cox role=played the part of SF who was able to remember 22 digits after hearing them only seconds before – 1 per second. The amount of effort was physical and emotional. With 250 hours of practice SF was able to recite back 88 digits having only heard them once – 1 per second. The short-term memory is something that can be expanded and extended with practice. The records are now being broken regularly, from 102, to 3 card decks (52 cards in a deck). It was emphasised that SF had average ability.

IQ was the next subject to be put under the spotlight. A study around sales people and horse racing was cited, and looked at who was the most successful, given the information that they have, at predicting results. IQ was not a predictor of success – the lawyer (IQ 118) was not as successful as a construction worker (IQ 85), with the construction worker using more complex formulae, and a success rate double that of the lawyer.

Cox gave an overview of the ‘Myelin secret’ – it’s not about neurons and synapses it’s about Myelin, the neuron insulator. The more you do an activity, the more it insulates the neuron, which takes a neuron from basic functionality to ‘super’ functionality that enables quick responses, thinking and interconnections. Neurons are stimulated by outside actions and influences; the first time you do something neurons fire slowly and are relatively ‘uncoordinated’ – the more something is done, the more the myelin insulates the neurons, and the better the performance of the neuron. Einstein’s brain was the same size as the average person but it had a lot more white matter – myelin.

As an overview, Cox concluded with a discussion of:
1) passion; passion maximises talent because talent requires effort and time, and is not always fun; Where talent meets talent, the person becomes unstoppable. Initially, the passion is not there; there is the requirement for a role model who encourages people to try something. Once a person tries something and realises that they are quite good at something, then this can translate to passion that helps you overcome difficulties and hardships. It helps when the role model is also passionate.
2) practice; it is not any old practice that makes the difference, it is ‘perfect practice’. The elite don’t just practice, they do deliberate practice that is designed to improve performance, and helps the individual identify specific elements for improvement. What meaning has this for students? The comfort zone is not your friend! Life needs to include challenge, things that push you outside of your comfort zone – things you do not know how to do. However, the ‘panic zone’ is also a negative space where a person is pushed too far, which often results in an individual giving up and/or withdrawing. Each student has a different range of comfort, learning and panic zones, so learning experiences need to be tailored to the individual. Practice is the ‘mother’ of skills and includes observation, imitation and repetition. It includes focussed work that builds myelin. Anders Ericsson says the 10-year (10,000 hours) rule appears to be consistently accurate – i.e. it takes 10 years to master something, whether it is playing a musical instrument, playing a sport, excelling in a career.
3) Feedback is vital when you are practising.

A thought-provoking session, with a lot of application for education, and helping learners meet their potential.

Hazel & Bettina, HERDSA 2009, Darwin

The HERDSA 2009 conference was held at Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Australia. Having arrived a day before, I had a wee bit of time to explore the township of Darwin.  The 2 ½ hour time difference meant that I was awake at about 4am, so hopped up, had a leisurely breakfast and hatched a plan to run to the Charles Darwin University campus for a look around as it was about 12km away. It transpired that the route I took along the coast, past indigenous settlements, and the racecourse, turned out to be more like 15 km! However, it was a delightful experience to wander around the deserted campus, enjoy the grounds, and spot the student creativity tucked away in an area that was obviously for relaxing.

The welcome evening was impressive. Held at the Parliament building, we were greeted with glasses of bubbly, and

Anne, HERDSA 2009, Darwin

The conference itself has been great…really well organised, and fun. For the techie geeks amongst us a wireless network has been set up especially for the conference, with IT support for anyone struggling with passwords and permissions. I, personally, found the first keynote very engaging. Ron Oliver was talking about the importance of outcomes focussed design and facilitation to engage learners and to enhance the acquisition and use of higher order thinking skills – especially those studying in blended and distance modes. In particular he suggested that the purpose of education is to encourage students to spend as much time as possible in a state where they are learning (as opposed to being busy). This state is fostered mostly where students engage a task that needs to be unpacked with a problem to be solved, and where there is no particular solution provided, thereby offering opportunities for creativity and originality. However, this mode can be uncomfortable at times, but learners do not learn very much until you take them to a point where they are uncomfortable. If learners are going to be pushed to a point beyond their comfort zone they need to be supported and scaffolded which act as a safety net and source of guidance.

A highlight of the conference was the activity where attendees were grouped and met on each of the days. Time was given to discuss learning experiences from the past, now, and what it may become in the future. It was great to be 

Audience, Darwin 2009

This morning I had a wonderfully chat with an academic practitioner who is dyslexic, and some of the design considerations that she builds into presentations, reading texts and online sites that make them accessible. So, for example, she pointed out that slides with dense text…or even with bullet points just meld into a mish-mash with ‘snakes’ of light running through the letters. As such, she tries to translate slides like this into a graphic or image…which has the knock on advantage of assisting students who find written literacy a challenge, English as an Alternative Language students, while also meeting a greater range of learning preferences. This once again, emphasised the value of the conversations and interactions around the presentations, as much as the presentations themselves!

All in all, I have thoroughly enjoyed the conference, have come away brimming with ideas, and also with a great appreciation of Darwin and the Northern Territories of Australia.

String trio, HERDSA welcome

Creativity

I have previously included a link to this Slideshare presentation, but now it comes with sound! :-)

Well - here I am. In Australia. In Melbourne. It has been a somewhat turbulent journey though and I am now sitting in not so sunny Geelong North....

Prior to my arrival in Australia, I was a little hasty in embracing wholeheartedly (and without reference to a map) the great accommodation Kelly found that was within my budget. As the owner of the motel assured us (and she is very nice) there is indeed a Deakin Uni about 20 mins walk away...just happens to be the Geelong Deakin Uni Satellite campus rather than the one where the conference is actually being held!

When I arrived on Sunday at Melbourne airport I began to be concerned after, having not found a shuttle bus to Geelong I hopped in a taxi which bowled along, and along.... About an hour and a half later and $AU 125.00 poorer, I arrived. Having found a map of Geelong I located the uni (great relief), but then could not find the correct road names - 'bugger' I thought, sulked, had a little tantie, and then set off to see if I could figure out what to do.

So, here I am about 100km away from where I should be, but luckily there is a train into Melbourne (takes about an hour - and it's only about $AU15 return, so it shouldn't blow the budget too much more) and then I'll hop on a tram to Burwood (another hour)...to where the conference is. Oops.

Geelong is rather attractive down by the Bay. It has an esplanade which I have run along several times now, on the first morning during sunrise which was breathtakingly beautiful. Unruffled sea, dyed blue, green and gold.