watched a documentary "stars for a cause" 3 on acid attacks tonight...triggered thoughts that I could use it to emphasise the importance of lab safety (not to treat sulphuric acid lightly) and also encourage students to be more aware and concerend about social issues that plague other countries
http://video.xin.msn.com/watch/video/episode-3/1gqtz0q29
http://www.acidattacks.org/blog/
new documentary on acid attacks (oscar nomination) - "Saving Face"
http://www.savingfacefilm.com/
Thursday 23 February 2012
Sunday 19 February 2012
media and values
2 videos on how the media, has shaped values and culture today and what we can do about it
http://www.starvingforethics.com/
http://www.starvingforethics.com/
Tuesday 14 February 2012
Reflections on microteaching
During my microteaching, I tried to incorporate higher order thinking questions such as “what makes this balloon expand?”, an apparently “simple” but broad question which hopefully stimulates critical thinking about the topic on gases as most people would not give a second thought to this question.
However, I found that there needs to be a balance between the type/amount of questioning and didactic teaching depending on the profile of students and the amount of time in a lesson. Some of my peers were uncomfortable with such “serial questioning” as they felt students may not understand it, though many of my lecturers were proponents of it. I also found that such questioning does take up more of the lesson time and hence has to be used judiciously within the constraints of the lesson.
Also, in the recapping/ recalling of prior knowledge, I noticed that many of my peers called on people whom they knew had done their microteaching on that topic, to answer questions regarding the prior knowledge needed. Similarly, in teaching, teachers may call on students they know have the prior knowledge/correct answers required in order to speed up the lesson. While this taps of students’ strengths to facilitate learning, it perhaps also stems from the fear of not being able to continue with the lesson if the “correct” answer is not given, or that the lesson may slow down as a result. Perhaps we as teachers need to learn how to build on students’ answers, be it wrong or right, to help our students think critically about their responses as well as take advantage of this opportunity to evaluate students’ understanding. I guess there is a certain degree of humility in admitting that we do not have all the answers and learning to construct knowledge with the students rather than be a transmitter of knowledge.
In some lectures, I profess that I “zone out” as it is quite difficult to concentrate through 3 hours of lectures. However, due to the nature of the questions asked, I could still answer the questions posed to me even if I was zoning out. For example, questions like “what is the definition of …” when the answer is already printed in the lecture notes. This reflects upon the nature of the questions asked and helped me to imagine what it must be like for students where they can easily zone out halfway during a lecture but yet be able to copy down information in the lecture correctly, but without understanding. Hence, I find that it is necessary to find ways to stimulate higher-order thinking during the lecture to keep students engaged and facilitate meaningful learning. Perhaps the blanks in the lecture notes can be designed in such a way that students are not immediately able to fill in the answers by themselves, or that the answers have to be derived rather than are given in the lecture notes. Also, questions asked can be of a higher-order as well. However, I do wonder if there are other ways of stimulating higher-order thinking as I recognise the limitations of a lecture setting that there will not be a luxury of having 20 students in a lecture theatre where you can call on each student periodically to answer questions, or wait for the whole batch of students to answer unanimously to a certain question as well, a strategy my peers and I often utilised to elicit answers and check for understanding.
Yet, due to the nature of a lecture setting, I found it difficult to incorporate questions or allow time for students to discuss and arrive at the answers themselves. Instead, I provided most of the scaffolding (e.g. step by step how to draw graphs and relating it back to what they learn in math, how to identify key words in the question and then how this relates to the concepts they are learning). This allowed the students to follow well, however, I wonder if students will learn to think critically if I always provide such detailed scaffolding. I do not have an answer. Increasingly, more and more institutions of higher education are moving away from the lecture-tutorial system into a seminar-style or interactive lectures. This is in recognition of the lack of interaction and hence thinking in a lecture setting. Hence, within the constraints of a lecture-tutorial system, I wonder how I would be able to stimulate critical thinking.
However, I found that there needs to be a balance between the type/amount of questioning and didactic teaching depending on the profile of students and the amount of time in a lesson. Some of my peers were uncomfortable with such “serial questioning” as they felt students may not understand it, though many of my lecturers were proponents of it. I also found that such questioning does take up more of the lesson time and hence has to be used judiciously within the constraints of the lesson.
Also, in the recapping/ recalling of prior knowledge, I noticed that many of my peers called on people whom they knew had done their microteaching on that topic, to answer questions regarding the prior knowledge needed. Similarly, in teaching, teachers may call on students they know have the prior knowledge/correct answers required in order to speed up the lesson. While this taps of students’ strengths to facilitate learning, it perhaps also stems from the fear of not being able to continue with the lesson if the “correct” answer is not given, or that the lesson may slow down as a result. Perhaps we as teachers need to learn how to build on students’ answers, be it wrong or right, to help our students think critically about their responses as well as take advantage of this opportunity to evaluate students’ understanding. I guess there is a certain degree of humility in admitting that we do not have all the answers and learning to construct knowledge with the students rather than be a transmitter of knowledge.
In some lectures, I profess that I “zone out” as it is quite difficult to concentrate through 3 hours of lectures. However, due to the nature of the questions asked, I could still answer the questions posed to me even if I was zoning out. For example, questions like “what is the definition of …” when the answer is already printed in the lecture notes. This reflects upon the nature of the questions asked and helped me to imagine what it must be like for students where they can easily zone out halfway during a lecture but yet be able to copy down information in the lecture correctly, but without understanding. Hence, I find that it is necessary to find ways to stimulate higher-order thinking during the lecture to keep students engaged and facilitate meaningful learning. Perhaps the blanks in the lecture notes can be designed in such a way that students are not immediately able to fill in the answers by themselves, or that the answers have to be derived rather than are given in the lecture notes. Also, questions asked can be of a higher-order as well. However, I do wonder if there are other ways of stimulating higher-order thinking as I recognise the limitations of a lecture setting that there will not be a luxury of having 20 students in a lecture theatre where you can call on each student periodically to answer questions, or wait for the whole batch of students to answer unanimously to a certain question as well, a strategy my peers and I often utilised to elicit answers and check for understanding.
Yet, due to the nature of a lecture setting, I found it difficult to incorporate questions or allow time for students to discuss and arrive at the answers themselves. Instead, I provided most of the scaffolding (e.g. step by step how to draw graphs and relating it back to what they learn in math, how to identify key words in the question and then how this relates to the concepts they are learning). This allowed the students to follow well, however, I wonder if students will learn to think critically if I always provide such detailed scaffolding. I do not have an answer. Increasingly, more and more institutions of higher education are moving away from the lecture-tutorial system into a seminar-style or interactive lectures. This is in recognition of the lack of interaction and hence thinking in a lecture setting. Hence, within the constraints of a lecture-tutorial system, I wonder how I would be able to stimulate critical thinking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)