We had a lively participant who decided on delivering outdoor mini-lessons on two occasions. Considering the beautiful day as well as the anticipated effect on boosting group dynamics, I happily went along with the suggestion, taking a flipchart and the camera with me. On the second occasion, which was on Day 3, the outdoor lesson (which was the first lesson of the day), as well as the following two lessons, went notably overtime. As, on the one hand, the instructors were earnestly taking new challenges and pushing their boundaries, and on the other, the learners were highly involved and excited to see their peer’s progress, I decided not to interrupt the lessons. The first three cycles went approximately half an hour overtime. The participants, however, were all cool with having a shortened lunch break, so we started back on time. What really thrilled me was that, following the morning sessions, the participants were so in-tune that we were able to finish each of the remaining cycles within 25-30 minutes, with full participation and exhaustive feedback. We ended up by not only totally making up for the extra time we ‘invested’ in the morning, but even with an extra 30 minutes which were dedicated to a free discussion on some of the interesting topics that had come up in our small group . For me this was a great experience showing that trusting the process and leaning toward well-formed group dynamics can pay off in enriching the feedback content as well as improving the small group timing.
Category Archives: New ideas
Achieving higher-level LOs within shorter theme sessions (30 minutes or less), through focused use of online modules
In our ISW on June 6, 13 and 14, 2015, we have been able to successfully deliver 30-minute theme sessions while achieving learning objectives on higher Bloom’s level (application, analysis and evaluation). This was made possible by consistently building up the face-to-face sessions based on the activities on the online module.
We provided all the necessary resources and definitions on the online module and asked a few questions to make sure they use the resources and respond on basic Bloom levels. We tried to show our presence on the online module, by checking on the comments and providing encouraging comments and rephrased summaries. In the face-to-face sessions, we built up the activities almost entirely based on the resources provided on the online module, as well as the participants’ responses to the questions. Using this approach, the need to spend time on introducing the concepts in the face-to-face session was minimized, and also, the participants were more motivated and could more easily relate to the activities they were doing.
For example, in the session on Learning Objectives, the definitions and guidelines for preparing LOs were provided online. On the online module, we also asked them to provide a sample LO from their first mini-lesson, and also comment on at least one other participant’s LO. Their participation was really impressive, and we also tried to encourage them by replying to the comments. In the face-to-face session, after a short bridge, we gave each participant a “Learning Objective Evaluation Sheet”, which was basically an anonymous LO from another participant (copied directly from their own online responses). We then divided them into 4 groups and asked them to evaluate the LOs given to them, by giving them a score from 1-10, and also by providing suggestions for improvement. By passing the sheets around within each group, eventually we ended up with their LOs being peer-reviewed by three other participants with specific suggestions for improvement from each reviewer. We asked them to leave the anonymous sheets on a table as they left, so that the author of each LO could have a chance to pick up their sheet and use the suggestions. It was amazing to see that 10 out of 12 participants took their peer-reviewed LOs. The effect of the session was apparent by seeing their LOs on their mini-lessons, which were among the best Day 1 LOs I have ever seen.
The whole session took less than 30 minutes. Using a similar approach for other theme sessions, we were able to have the lunch break between 12 and 12:30, while having at least two mini-lessons before lunch on all of the three days.
New ideas!
We created a new Dot-Mocracy Theme Session and it was extremely popular with the group: Classroom Climate and Student/Teacher Rapport
Learning Objectives were 1) Define classroom climate and identify 3 factors that influences classroom climate, and 2) Develop several strategies to create and maintain rapport with students.
The online components included basic definition and two scenarios of poorly handled classroom conflicts reported by real instructors. The participants were asked to select a scenario and to reflect on their own learning experience with respect to student-teacher rapport.
The in-class activities were scenario-based discussions for potential prevention and managing strategies. This was followed by gallery walk – the online contents were the prompts for this activity. (How can these strategies be incorporated into your own teaching practice? What are some potential pitfalls with this strategy that should be avoided?/Put checkmarks beside comments you agree with, and add further comments to either build or disagree with what has been said already).
The participants really enjoyed the “silent” gallery walk.
New ideas!
Used one lesson plan for all of the lesson basics 2.0 sessions (learning objectives, motivation, etc.) – participants added to it throughout each lesson and they really seemed to get how all of these elements fit together
Questioning techniques – spent some time on Socratic questioning which really worked
Leading discussions – left debate to the end so they were comfortable, small groups as teams, so they were comfortable with each other and competitive!
New ideas!
In relation to a theme session on challenging classrooms, we asked our participants to go online and, for 5 minutes or so, mention 1 challenge they wish to see tackled during the session. This did not work enough to be of great value, only 5 people contributed and 2 more the morning of the session – far too late to be of any use in the lesson planning.
We have had to come up with a few quick ideas to make up for the absence of contribution like pair-share to gather hopes or expectations. We used four challenging classroom scenarios and only 2 came from the participants. We ended up using four stations with challenge definitions and then pass the problem to use the collective mind to come up with ideas to different aspects of the issues: ‘what is the problem,’ ‘what could you have done before, during, and after. We ended with a large group brainstorm. This ended up adding about 15 minutes on top of the planned lesson. The participants were very happy with the session but the idea we have learned is: we must have a backup plan for sessions that rely on online participation. Having to come up with ideas on the run – even when they work – messes with the time table.
New ideas!
We tried to run one session completely online – the flipped classrom – with an intention to have a 10-15 minute revisit summary on the day, going over the participants comments, discussing what needs revisiting, underlining what seems essential and so on. Once more, we found that not enough participants completed the activity to make this effective. Only 9 people went in and did the work – and 2 more the morning of the session, too late to be of a lot of use. We have had to revisit the session quickly, adding 10-15 more minutes to do the homework collectively in session. It worked our more or less but not as well as we initially planned.
After the day we came up with this idea: from now on we will time the online lesson completions. As in: the participants will receive the link to the website on, for ex, Monday. They will be told they must complete the 1st day’s task in 2 or 3 days. If a participant does not do so he/she will be contacted personally to remind him/her of the tasks. The same strategy will be used again for the 2nd and 3rd day tasks too. Hard deadlines for the online tasks and further reminders in case of non-compliance seem to be essential to the lesson plans that use flexible learning. There are ways to make sure the flexible learning site is fully incorporated to our sessions but we must ensure the site is used and currently this seems to be our best idea to that end.