Teaching Strategies – Page 9 – Centre for Teaching Excellence Blog

The Power of Storytelling in Teaching- Zahra Razavi

Remembering the different components of the human body’s response to an infection was challenging to recall at first, especially when there were so many other similar responses to confuse it with. However, when the bacteria were thought of as intruders from another kingdom trying to take over the castle, the macrophages were thought of as guards who inform the king and queen of the intrusion, and the neutrophils were thought of as the kingdom’s army who defeat the intruders and saved the kingdom, remembering the response wasn’t as challenging.

Story telling is a powerful learning tool. We have used stories as a way to convey information and to share experiences for centuries. Many of the important life lessons we were taught as children were told to us through stories and fairy tales. Stories can arouse emotions in the listener, motivate and inspire them. The structure of a story can connect information together meaningfully and make the purpose of each piece of information clear. Stories also stimulate the listener to relate the new information being conveyed with their own previous experiences, which can greatly increase recall abilities and understanding of the new concept being presented. Instructors can see many positive effects from giving a lesson the structure of a story. Although it may be challenging to create a story from simple facts, the positive outcome can make it well worth the effort.

Seemingly unconnected data can be reshaped into something meaningful when given the structure of a story. Every lesson can benefit from a story structure. Giving a lesson a basic structure of having a situation laid out (a beginning), having a challenge presented (the middle), and reaching a new truth (the end), will give the information presented throughout the lesson significance, and will make the lesson much more memorable. Lectures in which the connections between the information being presented are not clear, and in which the significance of the data is not evident, are hard to understand, frustrating to listen to, and challenging to remember. As a biology undergraduate student, I know that I have spent numerous occasions memorizing information which I could not see the relevance of, and I was most likely forget as soon as I was done writing my final exam.

Our understanding of a concept can increase if the concept is presented in the context of a story, because a story context stimulates our minds to try to relate the new information to our own personal experiences. Using the structure of a story activates the areas in the brain that makes the story feel like the listener’s own idea and experience. The greater the amount of neural pathways we have to connect to a new concept, the easier it is to recall that concept and therefore make use of it.

Even though it would be difficult to teach every lesson through storytelling, it would be vital to a lesson to have a story in it to grab the student’s attention and or to drive the most important part of the class home. Even if we can’t teach everything through accessing the imagination we can help the students remember the most imperative points of the lesson through storytelling.

Photo by Simply Shar♥n; retrieved from flickr.com Creative Commons; license agreement http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

Teaching: It’s not about technology – Brett Beston

LectureChairs1

Much of my work-life is spent teaching: If I’m not lecturing myself, I’m helping others achieve teaching their teaching goals. However, I don’t consider myself to be an expert on the subject, just a ‘student of the game’. I spend a fair amount of time thinking about what I can do to keep the attention of my students. Sometimes, I’m not assuccessful as I’d like to be, so I keep thinking of what to do next.

In the current teaching climate, I hear a lot of talk about integrating technology in the classroom. This works out well for me because I like to ‘tinker’ and it’s all too easy for me to think about the different ways to play with technology in the classroom. As teachers, we often use technology as learning management systems to organize our courses, post lecture slides, create web-modules, hold discussion forums, and even poll students in our classes.

But the more I teach, the more I realize that a great teaching experience need not have anything to do with technology.

Technology is a tool that can be used to enhance a classroom experience, but shouldn’t be the focus of our teaching. No smart boards, iclickers or projectors will make us good teachers. What limits my performance in the classroom is the quality of my instruction.

So, I’m going back to my teaching-roots. When I started teaching, my mentor, Dale Roy, asked me to identify effective things that instructors do in the classroom. Not once did I think of anything related to technology. Instead, the most effective instructors that I’ve experienced seem to entertain as much as they inform.

Now, I don’t mean to imply that our lectures should be a circus act kind of entertainment. But, the best teachers that I’ve had go beyond simply doling out facts. Rather, they take a more personal approach to tell stories and experiences that provide context to the subject matter at hand. We are often experts in the area that we teach; why not share our own experience to make a subject matter more personal and create real world context that students connect with.

So I’m shifting my focus away from technology and towards an approach that shows my passion for what I’m teaching about and the experiences that I’ve had: To show them how I connect with the material that they are learning about.

I forget who said this to me, but I’ll always remember this little saying: “It’s not about the tech, it’s about the teach”.

Community of Inquiry in Online Courses – Monika Soczewinski

Photo by Dan Barbus; retrieved from flickr.com Creative Commons; license agreement http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/

Online courses and programs, and courses with a significant online component, continue to be a popular option for students due to their flexibility and convenience. However, as many students and instructors taking part in an online, or mostly online, course would agree, there can be unique challenges as well. One of these challenges is the sense of isolation students can experience while online. A student might feel disconnected from the class and instructor, and simply read assigned readings and submit assignments, all without engaging in any significant contact with others in the course or engaging in deeper learning. As someone who is currently enrolled in an online graduate program, I can attest that feeling isolated can happen in online or mostly online courses, but it certainly does not need to.

Mostly I have been lucky in my program and had wonderful instructors who worked hard at making the courses engaging and rich in collaboration. One course design in particular comes to mind, which helped make that course one of my most valuable learning experiences. The instructor in this course used the Community of Inquiry (COI) model to structure our course. This model was developed by Garrison, Anderson and Archer at the University of Alberta. A course designed using this model strives to establish three important elements – cognitive presence, teaching presence and social presence. The purpose of these three components is to create a shared learning experience for the students, which is reflective, collaborative and meaningful.

Cognitive presence has to do with students developing critical thinking skills in the subject area, and gaining a meaningful understanding of the topic. This part of the COI model can be fostered by asking students to engage in regular reflections and through guided discussions with their peers (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001). In other words it has to do with helping students create meaning of the material they are learning, and can be accomplished with the support of the next two components.

Teaching presence includes how the learning experience is designed and organized, how it is facilitated, and also includes the leadership component of moving the course forward in the right direction (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001). An important aspect of teaching presence is that it is not something that only the instructor is responsible for; instead the students increasingly share in this responsibility as the course progresses. It might be difficult to visualize how students can take part in teaching presence, because those components are traditionally solely the responsibility of the instructor. To give you an example from my own course, our instructor gave small groups of students the opportunity to lead the class discussion for a week on a given topic. This included designing the key questions to lead the discussion, making sure the discussion progressed smoothly, and preparing a summary of the conclusions the group reached.

Social presence is a component that might seem tricky to achieve, even in a fully in-class course, but is well worth the effort to strive for. It involves the creating of an environment that allows students to “be themselves” and therefore better identify with each other and the material. By providing an online setting that encourages the sharing of thoughts, reflections and experiences, students can build relationships and engage in discussions for a deeper learning experience (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). In my own course, the instructor first guided us by his own example. In the discussion boards he asked open ended questions, promptly responded to student comments, shared his own experiences and encouraged us to share our thoughts. More than that he made the atmosphere comfortable by being warm and personable with little gestures such us using our names, and even using emoticons when giving praise. Students quickly started to feel comfortable and realized that their thoughts and ideas were valued. Soon we all picked up on the example of the instructor and allowed ourselves to make reflective comments, give each other feedback and share ideas.

Using this framework, a course takes on a more active learning approach, rather than the more traditional lecturer-centered approach. Through active learning students can collaborate and integrate their learning and experiences to create a new shared knowledge (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001). Each of the three components of the COI model are important on their own, but it is when combined that the model really makes an impact on the learning experience. When trying to incorporate some of the tactics of the COI framework the key thing to keep in mind is that this is a technique that takes planning, dedication and a time-commitment – both from the students and the instructor.

If your interest in the COI framework is piqued, you may want to visit the Community of Inquiry website, which includes publications about the model and even discussion boards where researchers and practitioners can engage in a community of inquiry on the topic.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 17-23.

The ISW (Instructional Skills Workshop) Annual Reunion – Monica Vesely

The ISW (Instructional Skills Workshop) Annual Reunion – Monica Vesely

Since the initial offering of the Instructional Skills Workshop in May of 2008, 120 participants from across all six faculties have completed ISW at the University of Waterloo. On Wednesday, November 13^th, a group of ISW past participants gathered in EV1 241 to (re)connect with their fellow ISW alumni. This ISW Reunion has now become an annual event taking place in the fall term and allowing for ISW graduates to touch-base with not only their ISW cohort group but all past ISW participants. Through both formal and informal discussions, the transformative value of ISW is considered and encouraged to grow.

The Instructional Skills Workshop (ISW) is an intense 24-hour peer-based workshop that involves participants in cycles of mini-lessons accompanied by written, verbal and video feedback. It challenges the participants to explore new approaches to their teaching while at the same time being intentional about their lesson planning approach. The program started in 1978 in British Columbia and subsequently spread across Canada and the US. It is now an internationally recognized and facilitated program.

The Instructional Skills Workshop is offered within a small group setting and is designed to enhance the teaching effectiveness of both new and experienced educators. ISW encourages participants to reflect on the underlying processes behind the experience of teaching and learning. For many, the greatest value of the workshop lies in the opportunity to participate in and reflect on instruction from the experience and perspective of a learner.

Attendees at this year’s ISW Reunion had the opportunity to hear more formally from three past participants (Lisa Doherty, Shirley Hall, and Markus Moos) who shared their ISW story and how it shaped their subsequent teaching. After the panelists had shared their thoughts, the discussion opened up to include comments from the group at large. Past participants reflected on how the ISW experience had influenced their approach to teaching and what take-aways had made their way into their classrooms. Some even wondered about repeating the experience now that a significant amount time had passed since their own ISW participation.

If you are an ISW alumni, I encourage you to save the date for our next reunion, tentatively set for Wednesday, November 5, 2014. If you are interested in taking the Instructional Skills Workshop, please visit the CTE events page for future offerings. Our next ISW is scheduled for February 18-21, 2014 (Reading Week).

Universal Design, Accessible Lectures, and Other Fun Buzz-Words — Michelle Ashburner, AccessAbility Services

I love the chalk-and-talk lecture in math. I have had the pleasure of teaching thousands of first-years, and with lots of questions, discussions, pauses, and well-formatted notes, the chalkboard lecture can go a long way. It forces students to attend lectures if they want notes directly from the instructor, allows for the presentation of dynamic visual and symbolic material, and most importantly allows for quick correction of mistakes.

Ever since I have been working with the AccessAbility Services office, I have met many students who have disabilities that interfere with their learning in the classroom environment. These students, most of whom have an above-average to superior IQ, have found wonderful ways of compensating. They have inspired me to work on making my lectures more user-friendly to persons with disabilities (Accessible Lectures), as well make my course more readily absorbed by students in general (Universal Design).

The most challenging thing to do here was with regards to testing. The main idea of creating an accessible assessment is to provide choice. In the humanities, for example, students might choose between a 40% exam, a 40% essay, or 20% split between the two. Perhaps in a history class a student could perform an exam orally while another could write a paper exam. Everyone has a preferred learning style and strength of expression, and for students with learning disabilities, being able to use this strength is of even more importance.

Well, what choice can one give with math exams? Traditionally the math midterm is a collection of questions on paper, and the possibility of an oral exam, or an essay in lieu of a problem-style written exam is out of the question. There aren’t enough resources to issue oral exams to 400 students, nor can we ensure that students understand mathematical reasoning and calculations if they are to write an essay composed entirely of text.

The exam that I gave this term was made with large font in LaTeX (which looks like 14-16pt when printed), lots of white space, and clear instructions for each question. After two common questions, the exam splits into a Part 1 and a Part 2, and students are instructed to complete one part or the other. Part 1 is mostly composed of word problems, while Part 2 is mostly composed of algorithmic problems. Part 1 does contain algorithmic, calculation-based material, and Part 2 does require students to create problem spaces and to translate wording into math; they are just presented differently.

Of 400 exams, about 230 students chose to do mostly word problems, while the rest chose the algorithmic thinker option. Keep in mind that deconstructing a word problem and going through the steps of solving takes time, so that there were more questions in Part 2 (yet the points per part were the same).

Students with a case of math anxiety (there are SO many in my classes!) can consider the algorithmic part as opposed to freezing when coming in contact with only word problems under a time constraint. They will continue to hone their word problem solving skills within the tutorial environment, where they may choose to work on a group assignment or on their own. Come the final exam, they will be more prepared for the word problems that await them.

In my experience, those who are verbally strong and are more comfortable learning the “soft” sciences tend to be more linear and algorithmic mathematics students, while those that are more comfortable going through an unpredictable journey with a math puzzle and have a more developed mathematical intuition tend to be less restricted to linear thinking. They could be characterized as “global,” or “intuitive” learners. Honestly, learning styles change and studies continue to bring light to the learning styles and strengths that tend to go together. All I have to go on is what I’ve learned from my students thus far.

It has helped me immensely to see the perspectives of my students at AccessAbility Services. When I present a word problem, I always read the text after having them read it on their own; I give breaks to process information; I try to have the learning as active as possible by prompting discussion, asking questions, and holding votes (we have very poor voter turnout in my classes. I am worried about the future of democracy). I have digitized note outlines posted on LEARN in 14 point font, which are optional to use, but require attendance to have a complete set. My tutorial assignment instruction sheets encourage any student with difficulty producing written solutions to contact me by email, phone, or in person to discuss alternatives. I allow technology in the classroom (a whole other discussion on its own!), and I try not to assume ability to see in colour.

I have enjoyed the challenge of making an accessible math course so far, and I am looking forward to updating you all when term is over. Your thoughts will make this venture more of a success. Contact me any time.

Navigating the Pitfalls of Peer Evaluations – Kyra Jones

Having students work as a team for summative and formative assessment can be challenging, but implemented thoughtfully, it can be highly beneficial to students. Teamwork allows an instructor to pose more difficult problems that encourage deep learning. Group work can also be an effective way to engage students in a large class as well as prepare students for the workplace. Despite these benefits, group work can be challenging to implement.

One tool that can help group work succeed in a classroom is to incorporate peer evaluations. Peer evaluations help to provide a key benefit of group work in the classroom: teaching students how to give and receive constructive feedback. Peer evaluations provide a method to keep students accountable for their contributions to the team’s task, can help reduce group conflict, and lead to a more evenly distributed workload amongst group members. Finally, this tool can help alert instructors to conflicts in between group member. Peer evaluations have many benefits, but like group work, using this tool effectively takes careful planning.

First, the expectations of the students in the team setting must be communicated clearly and directly. Students need to be aware of the criteria by which they will be assessed and use to assess their peers. It is also essential that instructors formulate expectations that are realistic and align with the course objectives. It can be helpful to involve the students in creating the peer evaluation criteria and designing procedures surrounding peer assessment. This can motivate students to take the process seriously and address student anxiety surrounding group work. Students take more control of the peer evaluation criteria and process, promoting validity and reliability of the peer assessments.

It is also important to have multiple peer evaluations during group assessments. This allows students to develop clear expectations of their responsibility as a group member and gives students who under-perform, especially those who do not realize the are not meeting their peer’s expectations, a chance to improve.

Additionally, we need to provide students with the tools and skills to give and receive constructive feedback. Giving constructive feedback is not a natural skill and many students have not had the opportunity to participate in peer evaluation. One method to introduce students to this process is through demonstration, looking at a journal article or other work as a class and providing constructive criticism. Further, the class can work together to restructure examples of inappropriate feedback to create constructive comments. This skill that takes practice, which further exemplifies the need for multiple formative peer assessments throughout the project.

In my view, one of the most important aspects of implementing a peer evaluation system is to take into consideration your own teaching style and goals for the class. One model of peer evaluation may work for one instructor, but this model may be ineffective when implemented in your classroom. As with all teaching tools, it is important to tailor peer evaluation models to your own personality, teaching style, course, and institution. Being a good teacher is something we all strive for, but it is important to be a good teacher in a way that reflects who you are.

Peer evaluations can be a tricky component of group work, but with diligent planning and consideration, this tool can make group work a more realistic and successful exercise in the classroom.

Aggarwal, P. & O’Brien, C.L. (2008). Social Loafing on Group Projects: Structural Antecedents and Effect on Student Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255-64.

Cestone, C.M., Levine, R.E. & Lane, D.R. Peer Assessment and Evaluation in Team-Based Learning. In Michaelson, L.K., Sweet, M., Parmelee, D.X. (Eds.), Team-Based Learning: Small-Group Learnings Next Big Step (69-78). San Francisco: Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Engineering Integrative Learning Community

When our students make connections between their learning experiences within a whole program of study, between courses during a term or between their academic knowledge and co-op experience they are integrating their learning. Designing learning experiences with the intentional goal of helping students integrate their knowledge can help our students apply skills and knowledge learned in one situation to problems encountered in another. For more information about this topic and examples on its use on campus please visit the Integrative Learning section in the CTE webpage.
In the faculty of Engineering, our different programs have very coherent curricula that are very well structured with the aligned lab components, design projects and pre-requisite courses. In addition to our well-structured program a group of Engineering instructors took a step ahead by re-designing their courses to intentionally help their students make connections in their learning. In May 2013 we formed a group called Engineering Integrative Learning community. We have decided to meet twice a term. At these meetings a different instructor will share his/her experience in designing and delivering a course or a course component that focuses on integrative learning, followed by an informal discussion.
This group has met three times so far and we have had very useful and fruitful discussions.

I would like to invite all Engineering instructors to join this group if they would like to know more about specific experiences that others have had, contribute to the discussion, or share their own experience. “Anyone who would like to know more about this initiative can contact me at sssmoham@uwaterloo.ca