The 12th Certificate Award Ceremony of “The University of Tokyo Future Faculty Program (UTokyo FFP)” was held in the Seminar Room, Ito International Research Center on Wednesday, February 27th, 2019.
Forty-two participants completed the 12th program, and each of them received a certificate. Followed by the address given by Prof. Osamu Sudo, Director of the Center for Research and Development of Higher Education, The University of Tokyo, they received a congratulatory address from Prof. Yojiro Ishii, Executive Vice President, The University of Tokyo.
Alumni also appeared as guest speakers and explained their various activities after completion of the program and their alumni network.
UTokyo FFP has produced a total of 561 people who completed the program coming from every graduate school at The University of Tokyo.
The next program (the 13th UTokyo FFP) is scheduled to start in April 2019. The application form will be available on the following URL in mid-March.
DAY 8 “Envisioning Your Career Path: Structured Academic Portfolio (SAP) Chart ・Goals and Objectives ・Structured Academic Portfolio (SAP) ・The SAP Chart ・How to create a SAP chart ・Reflection
The UTokyo FFP finally reached DAY 8. This time, participants reflected on and organized their past activities, visualized their educational views and the significance of their research, and specified their courses of action and career paths through the creation of SAP charts.
Academic Portfolio (AP) is a tool to organize teaching, research, and service (i.e., administrative management of the institution and activities for social contribution), which are faculty duties, and evaluate the information regarding one’s achievements. Structured Academic Portfolio is a kind of portfolio whose description is structured and the procedure and points are clear. SAP is a document of 13–20 pages, and it requires a three-day workshop to create. SAP chart is a preparatory document for creating a SAP that visualizes the whole picture of SAP on an A3 sheet. This time, participants created SAP charts in three hours.
Participants identified the philosophy that underlies their activities by creating a SAP chart. Putting their philosophy into words and sharing it in pairs gave them a lot of insight. They found the core as a faculty member by thinking of the relationships between teaching, research, and service, and integrating them, and based on that, they examined their future objectives, courses of action, and career paths.
We received the following feedback from the participants: “I realized what underlies my sense of value,” “I feel impatient now because now I clearly know what I should do next,” and “I realized what I really would like to do.” They seemed to have gained a lot of insight from the activity of creating a SAP chart.
Facing your philosophy and sharing it with someone else is something that you cannot do unless you are in a safe and secure learning environment. The excellent course/class design of UTokyo FFP and a safe and secure learning environment created by the instructor and participants. Including DAY 8, I frequently encountered the moment when the interaction of these two elements led to wonderful learning. It made me think that I myself would like to create a safe and secure learning environment with my students, too. Come and join the UTokyo FFP for an authentic learning experience in a safe and secure learning environment.
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.
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.
Mini-lecture Program at the Library is an event where the UTokyo FFP alumni give mini-lectures and practice their teaching skills in an interactive teaching manner.
We have held the event 11 times so far in different styles. The next will be the 12th.
The schedule for the next event will be announced as soon as we are ready. Stay tuned for the next Mini-lecture Program at the Library and UTokyo FFP!
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.
Here is a brief report of our latest event and a preview of our next event.
“Interactive Teaching” Academy: Part 6 “Course Design (Syllabus)”
Date/Time: November 11th (Sun), 2018, 10:00–17:00
Venue: 93B, Faculty of Engineering Building 2, Hongo Campus
Participants: 21 people
Instructors: Kayoko Kurita (Center for Research and Development of Higher Education, The University of Tokyo)
Lui Yoshida (College of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo)
Nagafumi Nakamura (Center for Research and Development of Higher Education, The University of Tokyo)
1. Topic and Goal
This time, the topic was “Course Design (Syllabus).” Based on the goal, “Reconsider the syllabus as a tool to enhance student learning and be able to create a syllabus,” we set specific learning objectives as follows:
① Be able to explain the significance of course design and a syllabus. (Preparation)
② Be able to create a graphic syllabus for your own class. (The exercise in the first half of the session)
③ Be able to improve the syllabus you have brought into one that enhances student learning (The exercise in the second half of the session)
2. Summary
This program was conducted in a flipped-classroom manner, and participants worked on pre-class assignments beforehand. During the session, they reviewed what they had learned in the preparation and then worked on exercises of creating a graphic syllabus for their own classes and improving a text syllabus.
(1) Preparation
All participants were asked to watch the videos for WEEK 5 of “Interactive Teaching,” read Chapter 5 of the book “Interactive Teaching” (Kawai Publishing, 2017), and submit a text syllabus for their own classes.
(2) Session
[1] Introduction (10:00–10:15)
Participants listened to the explanation of the goals, structure, and rules of the program before introducing themselves to others.
[2] Review of What the Participants Learned in the Preparation (10:15–10:30)
Participants reviewed and organized what they had learned in the preparation through group activities. They reexamined the roles of a syllabus.
[3] Exercise of Creating a Graphic Syllabus (10:30–12:30)
Participants worked on creating a graphic syllabus for their own classes. The activity was to let them visualize whether they were successful in designing a course that enhanced student learning or not and further improve the design.
Participants learning from each other
[4] Exercise of Improving a Text Syllabus (13:30–15:30)
Based on the points they had learned in the morning and the “Syllabus Rubric” (i.e., a tool developed at the University of Virginia to quantitatively/qualitatively assess whether a class design is centering around learning), participants worked on improving their text syllabuses. They thoroughly examined whether their syllabuses, from the whole picture of the course design to minute details, were appropriately designed to enhance student learning by going back and forth between individual work on improvement and group discussion.
[5] Improvement (15:45–16:00)
Participants immediately applied improvement points/plans they had realized during the morning/afternoon exercises to their syllabuses while they were still fresh in their memory.
[6] Wrap-up (16:00–16:30)
Lastly, participants organized what they learned, what kind of questions they had, and what they wanted to bring back to their own work through group activities and Q&A sessions.
3. Participants’ Reactions
The affiliation of 21 participants was as follows: 11 faculty or staff members of the university or technical college, four graduate students or postdocs, two teachers or staff members of junior/senior high school, one teacher or staff member of elementary school, and three teachers or staff members of vocational school. According to the five-point scale question asking the degree of satisfaction (Extremely satisfied; Very satisfied; Satisfied; Not so satisfied; Dissatisfied), 55 percent of the respondents were “extremely satisfied,” 40 percent were “very satisfied,” and 5 percent were “satisfied.” According to another five-point scale question asking whether participation in the program would affect your future practice (Yes (very much); Yes; No (not so much); No (not at all); Unsure), 39 percent of the respondents answered “Yes (very much)” and 61 percent answered “Yes.”
Here are some of the feedback we received in the comment section:
“I used to write syllabuses partly because it was compulsory to do so, but I realized that reviewing a syllabus leads to class reform.” (Faculty member)
“I had no one to ask for advice in my daily life, so I was grateful for the opportunity to receive comments through Q&A sessions with the instructor and group activities.” (Faculty member)
“I learned the points of creating a syllabus and realized that they are beneficial to both me and my students.” (Teacher of senior high school)
We are relieved that the program was appreciated to a certain extent like the past events. We are eager to provide the participants with the opportunities to share their practices and improve our events to satisfy future participants by examining the points we need to improve as indicated in the feedback.
4. Preview of the Next Program
We are planning to hold a two-day seminar on microteaching on March 2nd (Sat) and 3rd (Sun). Details are to be announced. We look forward to your participation.
DAY 4 Evaluation ・Review of the Previous Session
・Goals and Objectives ・Significance of Evaluation ・Basics of Evaluation (Summative Evaluation and Formative Evaluation) ・Rubrics (Exercises in Creating a Rubric) ・Reflection
In general, evaluation is considered to be the “final judgment” that decides whether to pass or fail a learner from the students’ point of view and troublesome paperwork from the instructors’ point of view. The session started with the instructor’s words that asked the participants to change such views on the evaluation and instead consider it as an “escort runner” or a “compass” for students and a “tool to support teaching activities” to check the comprehension of students and improve classes for instructors.
Evaluation is divided into summative evaluation and formative evaluation. The former is for grades at the end of the learning process like term-end examinations, whereas the latter is for supporting learners during the learning process. Formative evaluation can be replaced by feedback, a more familiar term. If you only use summative evaluation, evaluation becomes the goal, and what matters for students will be a single examination, which makes them forget what they learned once the exam is over. Formative evaluation is necessary to avoid such a situation and let the students keep learning by making the evaluation a starting point.
In the latter half of the session, participants created rubrics, a tool for formative evaluation, in groups. I heard many groups discussing, “Do we really need to evaluate from this perspective when posing this task?” “It is becoming too superficial. It seems to be unable to evaluate what we really want to.” I felt that the participants truly grasped the role of rubrics as a tool for class reform by making them ask themselves, “What kind of learning do I want to enhance? Is this evaluation appropriate for that purpose?”
Whether it is a rubric or an examination, reexamining the evaluation from the perspective of “enhancing learning” leads you to face the question, “Do you really need to evaluate that?” No evaluations or classes can be said “absolutely correct” or “perfect,” and that’s why you need to keep working on improvement, an endless process. Class reform is, as the instructor said, like “building Sagrada Família.”
