Monthly Archives: February 2021

Practicum 1 – EOSC 110 V01 (Web-Oriented Course)

Hello again!

In this reflective post of my first practicum, I discuss the process of my lesson preparation, my experience during my lesson, and my post-lesson check-in with my mentor, Brett. Please note that I paraphrase any conversations we had.

About a week before my first practicum, Brett and I met briefly via Zoom, where I asked him a few questions about the dynamics of his class (EOSC 110 – The Solid Earth: A Dynamic Planet) to prepare for my lesson. Brett informed me that in addition to quiz questions he asks students throughout the lesson he also includes a participatory learning activity. The activity is normally uploaded onto Microsoft Teams for students to annotate. I was (and still am) unsure on how to fully use Microsoft Teams, but Brett suggested that I create an activity using PowerPoint slides which he would then upload for me on Microsoft Teams for the students. I asked Brett things I should consider when preparing my lesson, and he mentioned that the students are non-majors, most students have English as their second language, and all students are unfamiliar with geology jargon. This was very helpful to me so that as I created my lesson I was conscious about avoiding non-essential jargon, and when introducing new ideas or new jargon to check-in in with the students by implementing quiz questions to make sure they understand it before moving on with the lesson.

A few days before my first practicum, Brett sent me two items: a lesson on the rock cycle and igneous rocks that was being taught the day before mine, and a list of learning objectives with a few slides that were taken from a version of the lesson he taught last year. He decided to split the original lesson (which was the different types of volcanoes, and their explosivity, shape, products, hazards, and global distribution) into two separate lessons, so it was up to me to modify the materials he gave me to create a lesson that focuses on volcano shapes, explosivity, and products, and create quiz questions to and a participatory activity for that lesson. I appreciated Brett sending me materials taught in the lesson prior to mine so that I could see what the students knew about igneous rocks and processes and reference back to that material to help the students connect how processes discussed in that lesson relate to the processes that would be discussed in my lesson.

Some of the CATL teaching and learning theories that I tried to implement in my teaching plan included the Theory of Constructivism, Active Learning, Assessment, and Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Regarding the Theory of Constructivism, I tried to create a context for the lesson and building knowledge from previous experiences with volcanoes by getting students to reflect and post their answers by prompting them with a few questions. I also encouraged students to build knowledge from the previous lesson that Brett taught by asking a couple quiz questions relating the material of the previous lesson to the current lesson material. From this, I noticed students were quite responsive throughout the lesson and were not afraid to contribute when I asked students to help create definitions for new ideas on some blank slides. For Active Learning, students worked in pairs and discussed prompted questions amongst themselves and then drew and annotated two different types of volcanoes with their partner. From this, I saw students implement elements from the lesson into their drawings and creating a story, showing how processes at different scales affect the shape, explosivity, and products of volcanoes; this may touch on Experiential Learning Theory, but I’m still working on my own understanding of the theory. To assess students’ progress throughout the lesson, I incorporated quiz questions to see if they were meeting the LOs. This allowed me to see when students were understanding an idea, or when they weren’t quite understanding it. This helped me gauge where students needed more help or when an idea needed to be re-explained. Lastly, I incorporated a bit of Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Throughout the lesson, I wanted to draw attention to how microscopic (small-scale) processes affect macroscopic (large-scale) processes, for example, how silicate content in a magma affects its viscosity, and in turn, the shape of a volcano and the explosivity of a volcano. Not only did I echo this during lecturing, but it was also incorporated into the learning activity. The results of the learning activity and the quiz responses showed me that overall students were building an understanding of how to think about volcanic processes. However, I think I would have gotten a better sense of how students were affected by this if I facilitated a class discussion where students discussed how the processes they learnt about affect each other.

I chose to approach the lesson from the point of view of how humans are impacted by volcanism because (1) it is easier to become motivated about a subject if it impacts you in some way, and (2) this lesson was preparing students for a more in-depth lesson on volcanic hazards. I think this was successful because this allowed students to personalize the meaning of the lesson to them, thinking about how volcanoes have or could impact their lives. Students were very responsive to my questions regarding their thoughts and feelings about volcanoes with respect to society and themselves. Throughout the lesson, I was trying to teach students how to relate different magmatic processes at different scales. To help guide students, I chose to start from small-scale processes (silicate concentrations affecting magma composition and viscosity) to large-scale processes (volcano shape, explosivity, and products). I think this approach was successful because most of the students were successfully meeting the learning objectives for the lesson. I think that the lesson could also be taught successfully from going large to small. I simply chose to go from small to large scale processes because their previous lesson that was related to this material was talking about small-scale processes, so I thought it would be easier for students to build up (scale-wise) from that. To help students apply what they learnt outside of the context they learnt it in, I asked students to look at a map of the Earth’s active tectonic plate boundaries with current active volcanoes and consider questions such as (1) Do people often live near active plate boundaries and volcanoes? (2) What types of volcanoes occur near you? Near UBC? (3) What types of hazards should these people be aware of in these settings?

If I did the lesson again I would definitely keep the learning activity, however, I would fine-tune the instructions and provide a sample for each step of the activity to help guide students. I looked at their drawings and most were on the right track but there were some common key elements that were missing in most of their drawings (i.e., the correct shape of the volcanoes which is caused by different viscosities which is attributed to the concentration of silicate in the melt). I think another fun idea could be to get a group of students to draw one type of volcano and another group a different type, and then each group could teach the other group about the volcano that they drew. Something else I would change would be my example photo for a volcano with rhyolitic lava since it was not as accurate as it could have been. It was a stratovolcano but should have been a dome and it is important for students to not mix those up. I think this mistake stems from my own lack of exposure to seeing photos of rhyolite domes throughout my education, and I don’t want to repeat the cycle! Regarding videos I incorporated in the lesson, I would make sure to maximize the videos (theatre mode) and add the video link on the slide under the video. I didn’t realize that some students were watching the lesson off their phones or small-screened devices, so not maximizing the videos must have not been very useful to them. Lastly, I would like to ask for student feedback after the lesson via a quick < 5-minute survey, just checking what points were clear and not clear and why, and if students felt if they were motivated and felt included and why/why not. 

Observation 2 – EOSC 221 201 (Web-Oriented Course)

EOSC 221 – Introduction to Petrology, is a second-year geology course for majors that has a lesson and lab component. I am very familiar with the themes taught in the course as I was a lab Teaching Assistant for the course in 2019 and 2020. Although I taught the lab component of the course, I never attended a lecture to see what students were learning in class. This course is traditionally taught face-to-face and in a lecture format, where lectures are not recorded. However, this term the course is being taught online where lessons are recorded. In addition, this term is being taught using a flipped-classroom approach instead of a lecture format. In the lesson that I observed on February 4th, 2021, 36 of 60 students attended.

Instead of listening to a synchronous lecture, students are assigned asynchronous reading of the relevant annotated lesson notes and a pre-lesson quiz (with multiple attempts) where they can check their understanding of concepts before they attend the synchronous lesson. The synchronous lesson I attended involved the instructor (Lucy) asking students poll-type questions using the Zoom poll function and discussion-based questions, where students discuss in the Zoom chat, annotate the lesson slides, and talk aloud. These questions reflected key points that were given in the pre-lesson readings and assessed what the students understood from the readings. After ~30 minutes into the lesson, Lucy provided the students with a worksheet, where they got to work in breakout rooms with a few of their peers for the rest of the time to practice applying the new concepts that they learnt about in the readings and reviewed in the first part of the lesson.

Some of the teaching values that I identified from Lucy’s teaching include nurturing, motivation, apprenticeship, and engagement. The value of nurturing was demonstrated when she checked in with her students’ well-being at the beginning of class. This value was also demonstrated when she checked in on all her students during the worksheet activity, and when she stayed late after the lesson ended to help students with the worksheet and other questions they had about the course materials. Lucy values motivation, where she tries to get students to build a personal connection with the material they are learning. For example, when discussing the genesis and characteristics of andesitic and rhyolitic lavas and rock types, she used an example of a volcano close to Vancouver i.e., Mount St. Helens. She asked students if they have ever heard of the famous Mount St. Helens eruption, and if anyone has ever hiked the volcano. In doing this, Lucy also made a connection between the theory students were learning and the real-world application of the theory (i.e., magma evolution through processes such as partial melting, crystal fractionalization, and assimilation). Lucy demonstrated the value of apprenticeship in a couple of ways. For instance, when introducing or reviewing new jargon she would provide the students with an opportunity to practice using the jargon by asking them questions where they respond in the Zoom chat, for example, “This is a porphyritic rock, these are phenocrysts. What do we call the stuff between the phenocrysts?” Where students responded with “groundmass”. Another instance of apprenticeship lies within the worksheet that she provides her students with, where they get to practice using ideas that were introduced to them in the pre-lesson readings. Finally, the value of student engagement was highlighted throughout the entire lesson, where she was constantly getting students to participate in activities.

Lucy is trying to teach the students how geologists approach investigating the evolution of a melt and the formation of intermediate and felsic rock types. She initially teaches students about the tools and strategies that geologists use to understand the composition of different minerals, and then how those apply to the crystallization history of a rock type, and in turn the evolution of a melt. Then she gets students to apply the tools and practice the strategies learnt to simplified and hypothetical examples, and then afterward to real-world examples.

I really like the hybrid version of a flipped-classroom Lucy does. I like that students get to read annotated notes beforehand and come to class to practice applying their knowledge in the class with the support of their instructor and ask questions about material that was unclear. I particularly like that Lucy does Zoom poll and discussion-type questions for the first half of the class and then gets students to work on a worksheet for the second half of the class. I would like to practice this style of teaching if I was an instructor or co-instructor of a course. I feel like it may be hard to practice flipped-classroom as a guest lecturer if the students are used to only getting a lecture in the class that you are guest lecturing in, as several of the students may not do the pre-readings and in turn not participate in the class activities. Regardless of whether I go to teach a lesson with more of a traditional approach or some degree of a flipped-classroom approach, I think I would be able to steal the practice of having the students complete a worksheet in breakout rooms for the second half of the class. I like the idea of having time carved out for the students to apply what they have just learnt so that they can move through the experiential learning cycle and gain concrete experience.

Lucy and I briefly chatted after the lesson I observed. I asked Lucy what it was like teaching a flipped-classroom in an online setting with respect to student engagement. She told me that since moving to an online setting, students are actually more willing to participate in class discussions and ask questions regarding material that is unclear (especially in the Zoom chat). This fascinated me as it seems that the online setting somehow helps students become more comfortable in engaging in lessons. If I were to teach in a face-to-face setting, I would like to create that comfort that students feel in an online setting, however, I know that may be challenging and it may just be the fact that students feel more comfortable in the online setting because they don’t have the pressure of their peers staring at them as they ask a question, in addition, their peers may not be able to put a name to their face, making it feel a little more anonymous.

I asked Lucy for any general advice that she has for me before I teach a lesson for her. She said to practice being patient when asking a question and waiting for student responses. For example, she said that if students begin to respond in the chat function to not acknowledge the first time a correct answer pops up, but to wait for multiple people to respond. This advice made me reflect on what I do when I ask questions. I normally wait for ~15-30 s for someone to respond, but I don’t often wait for everyone to respond before I say “Yes that is correct!”. Waiting for people to enter their responses into the chat before acknowledging the correct answer(s) gives everyone a chance to put in their ideas instead of shutting everyone down after only one or two people have responded. Lucy also brought up that with this flipped-classroom style it can be challenging to balance talking time with activity time, for example, sometimes the first portion of the class goes on for too long, and then there are only 10-minutes left for a 25-minute activity. To try to plan to allow enough time for the worksheet activity, she encouraged me to try to use between 10 to 15 Powerpoint slides for when I teach a lesson for her class, where each slide is either regarding a poll question, a discussion question, or an idea to review that students may find tricky.