studentwork: Consultancy Step 1

------=_NextPart_000_0176_01BE6AE4.480AFD00
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0177_01BE6AE4.480AFD00"

------=_NextPart_001_0177_01BE6AE4.480AFD00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The following is an overview of a dilemma being presented by Kim Carter =
of Souhegan High School. This is Step 1 of the consultancy protocol as =
outlined on =
www.learner.org/workshops/criticalissues/resources/studentwork1.h=
tml=20

How do I better structure and manage the Introduction to Video course to =
engage a heterogeneous group of students who possess varying degrees of =
time management skills in individualized, self-directed learning?

Who are the students? 16 students, with varying degrees of video =
experience (none at all to a course at another school =96 1/2 were in my =
9th grade 20-session video workshop classes 2 and 3 years ago), interest =
(two seniors who plan to major in communications, 3 or 4 with =
significant talent and potential, several with high interest, 4 or 5 who =
need the credit to graduate and saw this as an easy pass), and =
commitment (2 or 3 who follow through on assignments, meet deadlines, =
are conscientious about engaging with the concepts and skills, 5 or 6 =
who can=92t make deadlines but will do quality work, 5 or 6 who do the =
work but not on time and not with quality, and 2 who are not doing any =
work). [So the Bell Curve remains evident in student initiative =96 =
fodder for a separate inquiry.]

Why do I want to teach this way? Philosophically I believe the more =
students are personally involved in planning and taking responsibility =
for their own learning, the more engaged they are and the more they =
retain and are able to apply and transfer. Practically the heterogeneity =
of the class dictated an alternative approach to my past method of =
teaching, which involved the same syllabus, schedule, assessment, and =
teaching methods for everyone. Pedagogically, I believe as students move =
toward graduation from our system, they must be taught the skills to be =
self-directed learners who set goals, pursue learning in the most =
effective manner, assess the effectiveness of the process, and evaluate =
the worthiness of the product based on clearly identified standards and =
personal benchmarks.

What have I done? Initial surveys (see attached) had students identify =
goals, interests, prior knowledge, and learning styles. Individualized =
contracts (see attached) were negotiated and weekly reviews of progress =
toward the contracted grade have been held. Weekly work plans (see =
attached) are filled out on Mondays. Group sessions are identified on =
the schedule, including teaching sessions (such as editing workshop or =
storyboard workshop). I realize at this point one thing I should have =
done would have been to have students summarize their weekly =
accomplishments and compare to the work plans, with some accountability =
factor included in their negotiated grading contract. Students have to =
check in with me daily and report where they will be and what they will =
be doing.=20

I do follow up, monitoring their activities in the various areas of the =
building. I am available for one-on-one assistance beyond the workshops =
that are scheduled throughout the course. Students also may opt for =
credit for peer assistance and/or take advantage of peer assistance. =
Student feedback has been solicited primarily through class and =
individual dialogue.

For mid-term Progress Reports I tried another departure from my normal =
practices: everyone=92s grade was bumped up one grade (B to a B+ , for =
example). I talked with the class and with each individual student about =
my rationale (incentive as opposed to threat) relative to their work (in =
progress and incomplete).

Contracts have been renegotiated based on assessment of learning =
strengths and styles along with areas each individual is in need of =
developing. In some cases, I insisted on heavier weighting of the grade =
from assessments an individual was not strong in, particularly if I felt =
it was a significant proficiency for video production.=20

>From the beginning, students had the option of choosing a letter grade, =
based on assignments, deadlines, and other self-discipline based ongoing =
performances, or a Pass/Fail grade, based on exhibition of proficiencies =
in the skills and concepts identified at the beginning of the course. =
All students chose to work for grades. I am now encouraging some to =
consider opting for the Pass/Fail option.

How do the results compare with past classes=92 performance? I won=92t =
completely know until it is done and we debrief. However, the spread of =
student performance is very similar to what every previous video class =
has exhibited =96 a couple of conscientious students, a range of modest =
compliance with requirements, and usually two students who do nothing or =
next to nothing for the trimester and then want to (need to , for =
graduation!) pull out a passing grade in the last two weeks of the =
course. What seems to be different, at present, is that ALL the students =
are behind the desired schedule for their final project work. With one =
week left before exhibitions, none have begun editing and only three =
have completed their taping, with the rest planning to do so over the =
weekend.

Student feedback indicated initially that this structure was hard: they =
are used to being told what to do, what to learn, and when to do and =
learn it. In response I made available more structured sessions with me. =
A third of the class chose to attend the workshop sessions I offered and =
a different third of the class had me give them specific assignments for =
skills tapes and projects. It will be interesting to correlate this with =
student achievements for the trimester.=20

------=_NextPart_001_0177_01BE6AE4.480AFD00
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The following is an overview of a dilemma being presented by Kim = Carter of=20 Souhegan High School. This is Step 1 of the consultancy protocol = as=20 outlined on www.learner.org/workshops/criticalissues/reso= urces/studentwork1.html=20

Step 1: Overview

How do I better structure and manage the Introduction to Video course = to=20 engage a heterogeneous group of students who possess varying degrees of = time=20 management skills in individualized, self-directed learning?

Who are the students? 16 students, with varying degrees of video=20 experience (none at all to a course at another school – 1/2 = were in=20 my 9^th grade 20-session video workshop classes 2 and 3 years = ago),=20 interest (two seniors who plan to major in communications, 3 or 4 = with=20 significant talent and potential, several with high interest, 4 or 5 who = need=20 the credit to graduate and saw this as an easy pass), and=20 commitment (2 or 3 who follow through on assignments, meet = deadlines, are=20 conscientious about engaging with the concepts and skills, 5 or 6 who=20 can’t make deadlines but will do quality work, 5 or 6 who do the = work but=20 not on time and not with quality, and 2 who are not doing any work). [So = the=20 Bell Curve remains evident in student initiative – fodder for a = separate=20 inquiry.]

Why do I want to teach this way? Philosophically I believe = the=20 more students are personally involved in planning and taking = responsibility for=20 their own learning, the more engaged they are and the more they retain = and are=20 able to apply and transfer. Practically the heterogeneity of the = class=20 dictated an alternative approach to my past method of teaching, which = involved=20 the same syllabus, schedule, assessment, and teaching methods for = everyone.=20 Pedagogically, I believe as students move toward graduation from = our=20 system, they must be taught the skills to be self-directed learners who = set=20 goals, pursue learning in the most effective manner, assess the = effectiveness of=20 the process, and evaluate the worthiness of the product based on clearly = identified standards and personal benchmarks.

What have I done? Initial surveys (see attached) had = students=20 identify goals, interests, prior knowledge, and learning styles.=20 Individualized contracts (see attached) were negotiated and = weekly=20 reviews of progress toward the contracted grade have been held. = Weekly work=20 plans (see attached) are filled out on Mondays. Group sessions are=20 identified on the schedule, including teaching sessions (such as editing = workshop or storyboard workshop). I realize at this point one thing I = should=20 have done would have been to have students summarize their weekly=20 accomplishments and compare to the work plans, with some accountability = factor=20 included in their negotiated grading contract. Students have to check = in with=20 me daily and report where they will be and what they will be doing. =

I do follow up, monitoring their activities in the various = areas of=20 the building. I am available for one-on-one assistance beyond the = workshops that are scheduled throughout the course. Students also = may opt=20 for credit for peer assistance and/or take advantage of peer assistance. = Student feedback has been solicited primarily through class and=20 individual dialogue.

For mid-term Progress Reports I tried another departure from = my normal=20 practices: everyone’s grade was bumped up one grade (B to a = B⁺ , for example). I talked with the class and with each = individual=20 student about my rationale (incentive as opposed to threat) relative to = their=20 work (in progress and incomplete).

Contracts have been renegotiated based on assessment of = learning=20 strengths and styles along with areas each individual is in need of = developing.=20 In some cases, I insisted on heavier weighting of the grade from = assessments an=20 individual was not strong in, particularly if I felt it was a = significant=20 proficiency for video production.

From the beginning, students had the option of choosing a = letter=20 grade, based on assignments, deadlines, and other self-discipline based = ongoing=20 performances, or a Pass/Fail grade, based on exhibition of proficiencies = in the=20 skills and concepts identified at the beginning of the course. All = students=20 chose to work for grades. I am now encouraging some to consider opting = for the=20 Pass/Fail option.

How do the results compare with past classes’ performance? = I=20 won’t completely know until it is done and we debrief. However, = the spread=20 of student performance is very similar to what every previous video = class has=20 exhibited – a couple of conscientious students, a range of modest=20 compliance with requirements, and usually two students who do nothing or = next to=20 nothing for the trimester and then want to (need to , for = graduation!)=20 pull out a passing grade in the last two weeks of the course. What seems = to be=20 different, at present, is that ALL the students are behind the desired = schedule=20 for their final project work. With one week left before exhibitions, = none have=20 begun editing and only three have completed their taping, with the rest = planning=20 to do so over the weekend.

Student feedback indicated initially that this structure was hard: = they are=20 used to being told what to do, what to learn, and when to do and learn = it. In=20 response I made available more structured sessions with me. A third of = the class=20 chose to attend the workshop sessions I offered and a different third of = the=20 class had me give them specific assignments for skills tapes and = projects. It=20 will be interesting to correlate this with student achievements for the=20 trimester.