プログラム: FFP

DAY 7 Microteaching Session (2)
・Goals and Objectives
・Mini-lectures and Feedback
・Reflection

DAY 7 was an overall summary of the whole program, where the participants conducted mini-lectures for the second time by making an improvement on the lectures they had conducted on DAY 6. Many participants were successful in reducing lecture materials to be conducted within a limited time of six minutes and focusing on what they really wanted the students to learn about. Every single mini-lecture underwent a remarkable improvement, which clearly showed the participants’ learning and development.

I gave feedback to the participants on their mini-lectures on DAY 6 and DAY 7. I would like to share with you what I realized through the activity.

1. The necessity of a perspective of “Does this activity fit the learning objective?” or “Is this learning objective appropriate?” instead of “If I were the instructor, I would…”

When I observed classes conducted by other instructors and trainees, I always thought in a way like, “If I were the teacher, I would incorporate an intriguing activity here,” or “Why doesn’t he/she pose comprehension check questions to make sure if the students retained the knowledge?” These are from the perspective of “If I were the instructor, I would…” However, this perspective is likely to make you focus only on “teaching techniques.”

As I mentioned in the Journal Vol 6, experts’ perspective focuses on the “structure of knowledge” instead of “teaching techniques.” Keeping the “structure of knowledge” in mind helps you focus on “learning objectives” by thinking in a way like, “Is each element necessary and sufficient for the learning objectives? (Are there any missing or redundant elements?)” or “Does the class structure help the students accomplish the learning objectives?”

“How should the instructor structure the class based on the learning objectives he/she set?” “First of all, is this learning objective really appropriate?” These questions help you give feedback on the class you observe from a metacognitive perspective.

2. Good learning objectives equal a well-structured class.

When designing a 6-min mini-lecture, it is further necessary to thoroughly examine the “learning objectives” compared to creating usual classes. You may regard the “learning objectives” as a trunk and “learning activities” as branches and leaves. We are likely to start with setting “learning activities” (e.g., “I want to talk about these things, so I need this activity,” or “I want to incorporate these kinds of activities.”) when designing a class, but this is like creating parts without a design for a class and aligning them without particular reasons, which is likely to end in an “unstructured class.”

The art of class design is to keep in mind “backward design”: thoroughly examine “what you want the students to learn about in your class,” then design a class that helps them learn the target topics, and finally, create necessary parts or specific learning activities. After creating learning activities, make sure that they perfectly align with the objectives again. That makes your class slimline.

I myself would like to design a simple and concise (i.e., slimline) class based on the stimuli and learning I got from this second microteaching session.

This is an update to correct the information regarding the call for applications for a Project Researcher. The application deadline is January 11th, 2019. We look forward to your application.

Error: Ph.D. holder.

Correct: Ph.D. holder or equivalent.

We look forward to the applications from those who are eager to plan various projects and improve education by considering the post as their opportunity to “learn how to teach” by getting involved in the administration of the UTokyo FFP.

Click here for the application guideline.

DAY 6 Microteaching Session (1)
・Goals and Objectives
・Mini-lectures, Feedback, and Discussion
・Reflection

On DAY 6, participants finally conducted their 6-min mini-lectures, which were followed by feedback and discussion to refine the lectures.

A little more than 20 participants were divided into four groups of 5–6. There was an instructor per group, who facilitated the approximately 25-min sessions with a cycle of “Mini-lecture (6 min),” “Feedback from the instructor to the lecturer (3 min),” and “Group discussion on how to improve the lecture (13 min).”

Structuring a 6-min mini-lecture that makes students satisfied with their learning while incorporating an introductory section, main section, and concluding section, is so difficult that you can easily surpass the time limit should you slightly wander from the subject or take a little extra time to explain a topic. Polishing the design for a short-time class lets the lecturer face up to the question, “What are the essential things that I really want the students to learn?”

According to the instructor of the program, the art of advising the trainees in microteaching is “to try to think about ‘first-of-all’ issues instead of techniques.” Students need to restructure the knowledge they received from the teacher to really feel that they learned something in the class. Are there any structures missing when students try to restructure knowledge? First of all, is the knowledge structured correctly so that they can easily restructure it? I realized that it is important to focus on the “structure of knowledge” before “teaching techniques” with these questions to become an expert in conducting classes.
“First of all, did I examine whether the structure of knowledge of this class is appropriate for learning to occur?” I would like to ask myself this question every time I work on class design.

DAY 5 Summary & Exercise in Giving Feedback on Lectures
・Review of the Previous Session
・Goals and Objectives
・Exercise in Giving Feedback on Lectures
・Review of the Program So Far (Poster Tour)

Participants started by creating questions to review what they had learned in the previous session (about evaluation) and asked and answered them in pairs. This reviewing activity has become increasingly complicated week by week; a simple activity of explaining the keywords of the previous session in pairs (DAY 3), discussing the usefulness and limitations of the topics that appeared in the previous session (DAY 4), and creating questions (DAY 5).
As a course develops, students not only acquire knowledge but also become proficient in their learning. It made me realize that designing activities that align with the learners’ development can help them deepen their learning.

In the first half of the session, two participants conducted 6-min lectures respectively, followed by individual/group feedback and activity of overviewing the points of the lectures from a meta-cognitive perspective. In the second half, participants reviewed what they had learned so far (i.e., motivation, active learning strategies, class design, syllabus, evaluation, exercise in giving feedback on lectures, and the whole FFP) by conducting a poster tour.

In FFP, the instructor gradually lets the participants take the initiative in the class weekly. In today’s session, the instructor did not explain the material aggressively but instead let the participants engage in group discussions and realize something on their own, answered their questions when they shared their ideas with the whole class, and abstracted/generalized their insights to make them easier to understand, which helped them deepen their learning. According to the instructor, she deliberately “left the learning to the participants.”
I have always assumed that “To explain something skillfully equals to teach something,” but it seems to be “the skill in generalizing what the learners realized” that is the essential art of teaching/instructing. The session made me realize that the students’ learning process surely occurs without teaching them if you can generalize their ideas.