I spent 3.5 hours today to redesign the initial storyboard, using the critique of the reviewers as well as my own knowledge of what can be done to enhance the instructional unit. The easiest part was to eliminate that which was unimportant. It was relatively simple, because certain things were off the wall. For instance, reviewing grammar at the end of Class Session 2 is absolutely unnecessary, because there are tutorials that students can and should watch outside the class. Also, duplicate exercises were removed. One of the reasons for duplicate exercises was that the teacher possible didn’t know that online homework has already required students to do certain exercises. Finally, I reduced the size of the words and phrases to mandatory learning from 93 to 60. Because students will have to learn them in one sitting, it is reasonable not to overload them. Plus, at least 20 words in the lists repeat the words that students definitely learned in previous Spanish classes.
I received the critique for my storyboard from three people. Major points:
- Add evaluation and debrief
- Check timing and the elements that go in different class sessions
- Make practice activities more interactive
What would I want to change?
- Re-think the structure (remove explicit grammar teaching, reduce warm-up activities, remove duplication of watching a movie, extend time to practice vocabulary in speech, inform of objectives)
- Prepare vocab activities (lexical approach)
- Prepare assessment activities
- Focus on feedback and promote self-reflections
- Include writing activities
Storyboarding helps convince people in business (by realistically showing what will happen)—a visual that makes simple (if created well enough) and shows the client the problem, what can be done, and what can be done to close the gap. Tiffany used the storyboards in work, not just for the class. Has to look good and be very clear. IDs selling solutions to performance gaps – knowledge, skills, or attitudes deficiencies.
It took me a bit more than 6 hours to put together the initial storyboarding. What did I learn from doing it?
- It is hard to find appropriate images, you need to generalize the picture of what is happening in the classroom
- Each frame takes 20–30 minutes
- It is important to give credit to what has happened in the instruction, without blindly criticizing everything
- Assessment with the use of rubrics is something I haven’t done before with so much detail; it was hard
- The final slide was the flowchart (though it is in the beginning of the presentation), because I had to abstract from what I’ve outlined in the frames and conceptualize the sequence that the teacher followed in his Spanish classes in January 2016
I already asked 2 people to review my initial storyboard. I am happy with what I have, but another person’s look will always show you where you weren’t very clear.
I am very happy that, having spent 22 pure hours, I completed the assigned readings and self-checks on Wednesday and had 3 days off. Because of the visa thing, I went to Minsk. Precisely because I was able to relax, I sat on Sunday and created 5 slides (out of 11) for my initial storyboard. I find that it is actually hard to put things back together. Although I’m describing what I personally experienced 5 months ago, I still have to generalize it somehow and decide what detail to include in the storyboard and what not to include. In general, I enjoy what I do—I think I am really both a teacher and an instructional designer by calling.
Hattie, Timperley. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112 (24 pages)
This is my favorite sentence: “In general, feedback is psychologically reassuring, and people like to obtain feedback about their performance even if it has no impact on their performance” (p. 95). “Simply providing more feedback is not the answer, because it is necessary to consider the nature of the feedback, the timing, and how a student “receives” this feedback (or, better, actively seeks the feedback). As already noted, students can bias and select feedback information” (p. 101).
1) “What is contextual teaching and learning?” (4.5 pages) (CTL)
CTL “helps us relate subject matter content to real world situations and motivate students to make connections between knowledge and its applications to their lives as family members, citizens, and workers and engage in the hard work that learning requires” (p. 1). “According to contextual learning theory, learning occurs only when students (learners) process new information or knowledge in such a way that it makes sense to them in their own frames of reference (their own inner worlds of memory, experience, and response)” (p. 1).
1) Allen, Tanner. (2006). Rubrics—Tools for Making Learning Goals and Evaluation Criteria Explicit for Both Teachers and Learners
Rubric is “a type of matrix that provides scaled levels of achievement or understanding for a set of criteria or dimensions of quality for a given type of performance, for example, a paper, an oral presentation, or use of teamwork skills. In this type of rubric, the scaled levels of achievement (gradations of quality) are indexed to a desired or appropriate standard (e.g., to the performance of an expert or to the highest level of accomplishment evidenced by a particular cohort of students). The descriptions of the possible levels of attainment for each of the criteria or dimensions of performance are described fully enough to make them useful for judgment of, or reflection on, progress toward valued objectives” (p. 197).
There is a holistic rubric and an analytical rubric. Holistic rubrics have details (criteria and grading scales). Analytical aren’t so detailed, but they are detailed in their own way: they define precisely what needs to be done or accomplished.
“a “usable” rubric are to ask both students and colleagues to provide feedback on the first draft, particularly with respect to the clarity and gradations of the descriptions of criteria for each level of accomplishment, and to try out the rubric using past examples of student work” (p. 201). “descriptions for each level of performance provide a “real world” connection by stating the implications for accomplishment at that level” (p. 201). For example, ‘you study would convince peers and be published in a peer-review journal.’
“rubrics allow for both quantitative and qualitative analysis of student performance” (p. 202).
“can give students a clear sense of what the expectations are for a high level of performance on a given assignment, and how they can be met” (p. 203).
2) Mertler, Craig. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom
“Rubrics are rating scales—as opposed to checklists—that are specifically used with performance assessments” (p. 2). A “holistic rubric requires the teacher to score the overall process or product as a whole, without judging the component parts separately. In contrast, with an analytic rubric, the teacher scores separate, individual parts of the product or performance first, then sums the individual scores to obtain a total score” (p. 2).
Holistic rubrics do not give much feedback to students, more summative by nature. Analytical rubrics give a lot of feedback to students and teachers alike. Because each specific performance task is assessed. “Regardless of which type of rubric is selected, specific performance criteria and observable indicators must be identified as an initial step to development” (p. 4). “If an overall, summative score is desired, a holistic scoring approach would be more desirable. In contrast, if formative feedback is the goal, an analytic scoring rubric should be used” (p. 4).
But rubrics aren’t grades. Converting rubric ratings to a grade is more subtle, more logical than numerical. Find a system of conversion.
Luca, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Developing an instructional design strategy to support generic skills development. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Australiasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Auckland, New Zealand.