Trying to implement CASW sessions suggestions. I have made/am making my students rewrite the essays. parts of which I had submitted to the CASW group as their last/latest sample. While one student completed the essay , taking into account all the suggestions - and she has done a good job of it - with the other student I am following two of the strategies suggested in the CASW session - namely that her actual issues are not being given enough time and a thinking skill deficiency rather than a writing skill one...
As a result of giving her a longer time schedule and sitting and thinking what she is writing through with her - thus bringing into play another suggestion which is constant monitoring and feedback - I find that her essay is gradually becoming a satisfactory one. However the first part of my key question remains unanswered as yet. I need to look at the strategies suggested once again.
I am also wondering about something Tara wrote: are our exercises dealing with brain based learning and strategies or are they collaborative problem solving exercises? i am not satisfied with the collaborative strategy building session yet.
On a different note: I joined Aditi on May 9, 2005 for my induction course. During the course two students joined the five of us who were already there along with Tara who was mapping out evolving professional practice for us.
They were Parbati B and Mahesh. Parbati, a Bengali, had come from Vasant Valley , which was Bala's old school too.
Parbati has left us now and moved to Mumbai.
She shared the staffroom with me and Srini, two of the seven.
The time we had together was good fun She remains a good friend and I am glad I can remember her as a good colleague.
I'm sure none of us will forget your lesson on "ethnocentricism"
A pity I couldn't find the Disney Jungle Book CD to give you.
Still owing you cake. Or is it ice cream?!:)
Keep using your blog and stay in touch via email. Hoping to see you again in March. All seven of us will think of you fondly every now and then. koshy a.v. a.k.a terrestrian@gmail.com
for anyone interested in keeping in touch with Parbati her email addy is toping@rediffmail.com
The World Literature Blog
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Today was my presentation. Shuchi was the facilitator so things went smoothly. I presented my case using a Powerpoint presentation and also used samples of student work that included a range of unedited, edited and feedback- and - after examples. In the powerpoint presentation I explained the context. Students who are learning English literature show varied development in the case of their writing skills. Some are able to incorporate feedback instructions while some aren't. It's a question of how within the time constraints we work in , writing skills can be improved overcoming the negative impact of student variability.
My key question was:Taking into account the fact that I can spend only the same amount of time on both students, how can I equalize the learning of writng skills to mainimze the damging effects of student variabilty.
( a very pertinent remark made was that the word 'damaging' was not as appropriate as 'negative').
The group discussion and collaborative strategy building sessions after that were rich in suggesting alternate strategies to the ones I am using.
I am putting down the memorable ones:
Make the students write movie reviews.
Make them understand they are "authors."
Solicit feedback for the written pieces from other teachers, (warm feedback), classmates, and "unknowns"
by writing a description of the blog in such a way that people will leave comments.
Inspire and motivate by using things the students like.( Movies for instance)
Teacher feedback must be constant and immediate.
Marks and grades must be given.
A word limit could be given.
Collaborative writing projects. However this was considered a risky proposition in that it could create either anxiety through comparison or envy through competition.
Writing skills not being developed , a teacher rightly remarked, could mean that thinking skills was what was actually impaired. This has to be looked into at greater length.
Another strategy that was suggested was giving more of a time span for the student who is in need of more input
The issue was hopefully generic enough.
During the debriefing session an important point that came up was the one of ensuring that during the participant discussion the presented must not be involved in anyway, not even through eye contact.
The participants included our team of Bala,Joel, Viji, Anu and For quite some time Uday was there as an observer.
It was a very satisfying experience.
On being asked what strategy I would take back to class and implement , I felt that I would start with the last piece of written work of these students and try to improve that using the strategies suggested by the teachers and then bring the result in for my CASW review.
My key question was:Taking into account the fact that I can spend only the same amount of time on both students, how can I equalize the learning of writng skills to mainimze the damging effects of student variabilty.
( a very pertinent remark made was that the word 'damaging' was not as appropriate as 'negative').
The group discussion and collaborative strategy building sessions after that were rich in suggesting alternate strategies to the ones I am using.
I am putting down the memorable ones:
Make the students write movie reviews.
Make them understand they are "authors."
Solicit feedback for the written pieces from other teachers, (warm feedback), classmates, and "unknowns"
by writing a description of the blog in such a way that people will leave comments.
Inspire and motivate by using things the students like.( Movies for instance)
Teacher feedback must be constant and immediate.
Marks and grades must be given.
A word limit could be given.
Collaborative writing projects. However this was considered a risky proposition in that it could create either anxiety through comparison or envy through competition.
Writing skills not being developed , a teacher rightly remarked, could mean that thinking skills was what was actually impaired. This has to be looked into at greater length.
Another strategy that was suggested was giving more of a time span for the student who is in need of more input
The issue was hopefully generic enough.
During the debriefing session an important point that came up was the one of ensuring that during the participant discussion the presented must not be involved in anyway, not even through eye contact.
The participants included our team of Bala,Joel, Viji, Anu and For quite some time Uday was there as an observer.
It was a very satisfying experience.
On being asked what strategy I would take back to class and implement , I felt that I would start with the last piece of written work of these students and try to improve that using the strategies suggested by the teachers and then bring the result in for my CASW review.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
The first session of the CASW
We six , +2 group , namely; Hema, Bala, Joel, Anu, Viji and myself met at 2.30 p.m. in the A.V. room. Kalpana was also there as an observer . The session was facilitated by me. Hema presented a project on fuel cells and the use of hydrogen fuel cells in space shuttles and other applications like cars and buses. The powerpoint presentation shown was that of a project done by five 9 D students. She shared the learning objectives she had set and the guidelines she had given and also the assessment criteria. She also shared with us the mark sheet filled in by Mrs. Kausalya who had been the judge of the presentation. After presenting the work she asked the group her three key questions.
1. How can one assess if all the participants in a group do/divide the research work equally while doing group projects?
2. How to assess if learning has taken place?
3. How can students who have fear in presenting be helped to ovecome it?
After her presentation we asked clarifying questions.
This was followed by individual writing and reflection and then the group discussion of the participants in which Kalpana also offered valuable insights .
Many interesting insights and strategies were thrown up.
Some of them were
a. closer monitoring of the process
b. shared mentoring of the groups so that things could be properly monitored.
c. smaller groups
d. a common work diary or proof that the presentation had come out of individual and group effort.
e. that the students have a bibliography.
f. connecting the learning objectives to the assessment criteria
g. fluid guidelines.
h. proper documentation
These are only some of the views expressed. The actual discussion was richer than this.
After the group discussion ended, the presenter reflected on what had been shared and spoke of how it had helped her and said that for her next project on fire extinguishers she would implement the suggestions she approved of and bring back the result for review.
The collaborative strategy building section lacked focus but again threw up various suggestions . One thing that was clear was that projects should have a single unifying theme but the subtopics could be chosen bythe students. Work would be delgated according to liking within each group and proof that work was taking place would have to be shown. Presentation skills could be taught or there could be a mock presentation and the teacher could even be a counsellor in case of emotions like fear.
The session then went on to debriefing.
Certain clear suggestions came forth,
It was decided to have only two key questions maximum.
The key questions would be framed more carefully.
Copies of LO's, etc. would be a help.
Time for each part of the tuning sessions was much discussed.
A significant suggestion was that each participant keep a CASW notebook
Blogging was also emphasised.
After thanking all concerned mutually the group dispersed.
Thanks to Pande and the tech team and Satish and Kalpana for making things possible in/for the first session.
1. How can one assess if all the participants in a group do/divide the research work equally while doing group projects?
2. How to assess if learning has taken place?
3. How can students who have fear in presenting be helped to ovecome it?
After her presentation we asked clarifying questions.
This was followed by individual writing and reflection and then the group discussion of the participants in which Kalpana also offered valuable insights .
Many interesting insights and strategies were thrown up.
Some of them were
a. closer monitoring of the process
b. shared mentoring of the groups so that things could be properly monitored.
c. smaller groups
d. a common work diary or proof that the presentation had come out of individual and group effort.
e. that the students have a bibliography.
f. connecting the learning objectives to the assessment criteria
g. fluid guidelines.
h. proper documentation
These are only some of the views expressed. The actual discussion was richer than this.
After the group discussion ended, the presenter reflected on what had been shared and spoke of how it had helped her and said that for her next project on fire extinguishers she would implement the suggestions she approved of and bring back the result for review.
The collaborative strategy building section lacked focus but again threw up various suggestions . One thing that was clear was that projects should have a single unifying theme but the subtopics could be chosen bythe students. Work would be delgated according to liking within each group and proof that work was taking place would have to be shown. Presentation skills could be taught or there could be a mock presentation and the teacher could even be a counsellor in case of emotions like fear.
The session then went on to debriefing.
Certain clear suggestions came forth,
It was decided to have only two key questions maximum.
The key questions would be framed more carefully.
Copies of LO's, etc. would be a help.
Time for each part of the tuning sessions was much discussed.
A significant suggestion was that each participant keep a CASW notebook
Blogging was also emphasised.
After thanking all concerned mutually the group dispersed.
Thanks to Pande and the tech team and Satish and Kalpana for making things possible in/for the first session.
Sunday, January 15, 2006
After four days of intensive learning
It was good to get a grip on how the brain learns and strategies that can help in this. Dealing with one's own problem in the light of this was a satisfying experience.
Collaborative strategy building.
The videos of the tuning protocol and CASL were interesting and the CASW exercise was suitably gripping. Shuch and Tara did a fine job of faciltiating everything and ensured that it was a level playing field which made for a satisfying experience.
Now for the attempt to put theory into practice. Interesting....
Collaborative strategy building.
The videos of the tuning protocol and CASL were interesting and the CASW exercise was suitably gripping. Shuch and Tara did a fine job of faciltiating everything and ensured that it was a level playing field which made for a satisfying experience.
Now for the attempt to put theory into practice. Interesting....
Sunday, January 01, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments