} 学部生 Archives - Page 9 of 15 - 東京大学ファカルティ・ディベロップメント | 東大FD | TODAI FD.COM | 東京大学

対象: 学部生

Categories
Information

[Report] “Interactive Teaching” Academy: Part 7 “Microteaching Clinic”

Here is a brief report of our latest event and a preview of our next event.

“Interactive Teaching” Academy: Part 7 “Microteaching Clinic”

Date/Time: March 2nd (Sat), 2018, 13:00–18:00; March 3rd (Sun), 2018, 10:00–17:00
Venue: 93B, 92B, Faculty of Engineering Building 2, Hongo Campus
Participants: 32 people (Five of them conducted microteaching sessions.)

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)
Masaru Sekido (National Institute of Technology, Sendai College / Center for Research and Development of Higher Education, 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 “Microteaching.” Based on the goal, “Be able to conduct classes that promote student learning,” we set specific learning objectives as follows:
① Understand and be able to utilize “Learning Sciences” (e.g., motivation) in class design. (Preparation)
② Be able to explain the perspectives that you should be careful of when conducting classes through refining others’ microteaching sessions. (Sessions)
③ Be able to utilize the refinement of your microteaching session in your future practice. (Sessions)  *③ was an objective for those who conducted microteaching sessions.

2. Summary
This program was conducted in a flipped-classroom manner, and participants worked on pre-class assignments beforehand. They conducted and examined microteaching sessions based on their preparation.
(1) Preparation
All participants were asked to learn about “Learning Sciences” by watching the videos for WEEK 3 of “Interactive Teaching” and reading Chapter 3 of the book “Interactive Teaching” (Kawai Publishing, 2017). This was because it is important to understand theories related to enhancing motivation when you conduct classes that promote learning. Also, those who were in charge of conducting microteaching sessions were asked to submit class design sheets and handouts beforehand.

(2) Sessions
<DAY 1>
[1] Introduction (13:00–13:15)
Participants listened to the explanation of the goals, structure, and rules of the program before introducing themselves to others. They consisted of five lecturers of microteaching sessions and 26 observers who took their lectures.

[2] Microteaching Session & Examination 1 (13:15–16:15)
Participants first reviewed the significance of conducting and examining microteaching sessions. Then the first lecturer gave a mini-lecture. Then, they were divided into two groups and moved to separate classrooms. The second lecturers conducted lectures in their respective rooms. Following their 10-minute lectures, the participants exchanged their ideas on what was good about the lectures, what points needed improvement, and how they could be improved in groups and the whole classroom in 40 minutes.

Microteaching sessions

[3] Refining Microteaching Sessions (Lecturers) / What You Can Learn from Microteaching Sessions (Observers) (16:35–17:45)
Participants worked on activities in two separate classrooms.
Those who conducted microteaching sessions worked on improving their lectures based on the feedback they had received from observers in the first trial.
Meanwhile, observers shared in groups what they had learned from the first trial of microteaching sessions from the following two perspectives: “design contents” and “delivery.” Then, they shared their ideas with the whole participants through a poster tour. This activity was to help them generalize what they had learned from the microteaching sessions so that they can utilize it to improve their own classes.

<DAY 2>
[4] Microteaching Session and Examination 2 (10:00–15:10)
All five lecturers conducted their second-time lectures, which were improved based on the feedback they had received on the first trial, in the same classroom this time. Each 10-min lecture was followed by a 20-min discussion, where they exchanged their ideas on what was excellent about the lecture, what points were improved, what points still needed improvement, and how they could be improved. The observers were able to examine the lecture from various perspectives since they consisted of both who took the lecture for the first time and the second time.

[5] Microteaching as a Faculty Development Program (15:10–16:20)
Participants examined in groups what organizers, lecturers of microteaching sessions, and observers should prepare themselves and try to do to make microteaching significant as an FD program. This activity helped them examine what they should be careful of when conducting microteaching in their own learning environment and propose what we should do to improve microteaching in this event.

[6] Wrap-up (16:30–17:00)
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.

Participants learning from each other ([5] Microteaching as an FD Program)

3. Participants’ Reactions
The affiliation of 32 participants was as follows: 12 faculty or staff members of the university or technical college, 12 graduate students or postdocs, four teachers or staff members of junior/senior high school, one teacher or staff member of elementary school, two teachers or staff members of vocational school, and one company employee. According to the five-point scale question asking the degree of satisfaction (Extremely satisfied; Very satisfied; Satisfied; Not so satisfied; Dissatisfied), 44 percent of the respondents were “extremely satisfied,” 52 percent were “very satisfied,” and 4 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), 25 percent of the respondents answered “Yes (very much),” 67 percent answered “Yes,” and 8 percent answered, “No (not so much).”

Here are some of the feedback we received in the comment section:

  • “I was able to deepen my understanding through the structure of the program that proceeded in the order of the first microteaching session, improvement of lectures, and the second microteaching session.” (Lecturer of the microteaching sessions)
  • “There was a lecturer who made a remarkable improvement in his/her lecture on the second day, which offered me a specific example of improving the class design.” (Observer of the microteaching sessions)
  • “The program gave me a lot of practical tips on how to improve my classes. I will revise my class design materials for the next academic year as soon as I get home today.” (Observer of the microteaching sessions)

 

4. Preview of the Next Program
We are planning to organize a more systematic program for the next academic year. Details are to be announced. We look forward to your participation.

References
Videos “Interactive Teaching” JREC-IN website UTokyo FD website
Book “Interactive Teaching” (Kawai Publishing, 2017)
https://www.kawai-publishing.jp/book/?isbn=978-4-7772-1794-6 (Kawai Publishing website)

Nagafumi Nakamura (Project Researcher in charge of “Interactive Teaching” / Main Moderator of this event)

Categories
Information

Videos Now Available: The 9th Mini-lecture Program at the Library

The videos of the 9th Mini-lecture Program at the Library held in the last academic year are now available online.

https://todai.tv/contents-list/2017FY/mini-lecture9?set_language=en

 

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!

Categories
Information

[Report] “Interactive Teaching” Academy: Part 6 “Course Design (Syllabus)”

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.

References
Videos “Interactive Teaching” JREC-IN website UTokyo FD website
Book “Interactive Teaching” (Kawai Publishing, 2017)
https://www.kawai-publishing.jp/book/?isbn=978-4-7772-1794-6 (Kawai Publishing website)

Nagafumi Nakamura
(Project Researcher in charge of “Interactive Teaching” / Main Moderator of this event)

Categories
Information

[Sekido’s FFP Journal Vol 4] DAY 4 “Do You Really Need to Evaluate That?”

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.”

Categories
Information

[Event Report] “The 11th Mini-lecture Program at the Library”

“The 11th Mini-lecture Program at the Library” took place on November 8th, 2018.

We held the event at the Library Plaza (General Library Annex) for the first time.
Following the same style as the previous event (the 10th Program), those who completed the 11th UTokyo FFP conducted mini-lectures they worked on in the microteaching sessions.
For more details on the microteaching and the previous event, please click here.

The audience was 17 people (including the speakers) consisting of graduate students and faculty/staff members at the University of Tokyo and other universities.
We received positive feedback from the participants. About 75 percent chose 4 or 5 when asked the following five-point scale question: “Did you get interested in the UTokyo FFP?” About 70 percent chose 9 or 10 when asked the ten-point scale question on the degree of satisfaction with the mini-lecture program.

We are planning to hold this “Mini-lecture Program at the Library” regularly. Please check the website for the announcement of the next event.

Lastly, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to all the University of Tokyo Library System staff members for their cooperation.

 

ー－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－

*Please click the following link for the lecture videos:　The 11th Mini-lecture Program by UTokyo Graduate Students | UTokyo TV (todai.tv)

 

Categories
Information

[Sekido’s FFP Journal Vol 3] DAY 3 “Adopting Backward Design in Course Design to Make the Course Easy to Learn”

DAY 3 Syllabus: Syllabus Design and Course Design that Contribute to Learning
・Review of the Previous Session
・Goals and Objectives
・What Is a Syllabus?
・Exercise in Setting Goals and Objectives of a Syllabus
・Course Design (Exercise in Creating a Graphic Syllabus)
・Exercise in Improving a Syllabus into One that Enhances Learning
・Reflection

This time, the class was about syllabus design and course design that contribute to learning.

In the beginning, participants reviewed what they had learned in the previous class in pairs. They explained the seven keywords that had appeared in the previous class in a way that could be understood by novice learners (i.e., those who didn’t take this course) to their partners in turn. I found it effective both for warm-up exercises for the participants and in making them organize their knowledge, so I would like to adopt this activity in my own class next time.

Syllabuses are not only a means for students to choose which courses they would like to take but also something that could enhance their learning, and are an effective tool for the instructors to design their courses; in FFP, we call every session a “class,” and a series of classes a “course.”

Participants first set goals and objectives, then determined how to check whether the objectives are accomplished (i.e., the evaluation methods), and moved on to the content and strategies for the class. Many of the classes that do not contribute to learning seem to decide on the content and strategies before setting goals, objectives, and evaluation methods. In contrast, “Backward Design” refers to setting goals and objectives thoroughly first and then examining how and what students should learn to achieve them.
One of the participants who seemed to have fun in course design activities said, “So what you should do is to design a course that you wanted to take yourself in the past.” I think the words capture the heart of Backward Design.

The art of the course design is said to recognize the points (i.e. expert blind spot) where the instructors (or experts) are capable of doing something unconsciously and so they are likely to consider, “Why can’t students do this?”, to “scaffold” for the students so that they could learn easily, and to gradually remove the scaffolds during the course to let them become independent learners. It was impressive to know that the instructor did remove the scaffold for the participants and let them learn by themselves by allocating more than half of the class time for their activities in this third session of the program.

Categories
Information

[Sekido’s FFP Journal Vol 2] DAY 2 “Specific Goals and Objectives Enhance Motivation”

DAY 2 Class Design
・Goals and Objectives
・Motivation (Flipped Classroom)
・Class Design
・Active Learning
・Exercise in Class Design
・Reflection

This time, the class was about the relationship between goals/objectives and motivation and class design that deepens learning while maintaining motivation.

We received the following feedback on the previous session from one of the participants: “The goals and objectives were specific, which made me prepared for the program as a learner.” Indicating “Why do I have to learn this?” and “What will I be able to do?” inspires and maintains learners’ motivation. What is interesting about FFP is that you will be able to observe your own learning experiences from a meta-cognitive perspective by taking the course as if you are shown magic and explained the trick at the same time.

The session was conducted in a flipped-classroom style, where participants watched lecture videos on motivation (and related basic theories) as a pre-assignment and deepened their understanding of knowledge by using it in a group discussion on how to advise a professor who has problems with his/her classes. Also, in terms of active learning strategies, they learned the effects of peer instruction by actually experiencing it.
The active learning strategies that the participants experienced in this class were limited to flipped classroom and peer instruction, and the others were just explained in a lecture, but according to the instructor, the course is designed so that they can experience all the typical strategies at least once for each throughout the course.

Categories
Information

[Sekido’s FFP Journal Vol 1] DAY 1 “Creating an Environment for Learning”

Creating an Environment (Getting to Know Each Other & 1-min Research Presentation) / Present Situation of Higher Education
・Goals and Objectives
・Icebreaker (Introducing a Participant to Another)
・1-min Research Presentation (Group Activity and Exchanging Feedback)
・Present Situation of Higher Education
・Reflection

Participants were waiting for the first class to start, sitting without conversation in a somewhat tense atmosphere, perhaps because almost no one had friends in the classroom and they had been given a pre-assignment to prepare a 1-min presentation in front of the class.
I was worried if group activities would work in such a mood, but once they had an icebreaker 20 minutes after the class started, the atmosphere drastically changed into a relaxed one, and they engaged in the following 1-min research presentations, attentively listening to others and actively discussing and giving feedback in groups. They were completely getting along with each other by the end of the class.

I think participants came to be able to learn from each other as fellows by the instructor repeating the keyword “fellows” when explaining the goal of the class, “To set a clear goal of learning at UTokyo FFP by getting to know other fellows that you will be learning with,” and the objective, “To remember five or more names of your fellows,” in the beginning. The carefully designed class structure of gradually and smoothly developing simple activities into complicated ones was also effective; the class started by involving the participants with closed questions (i.e., questions with fixed answers like “Yes” or “No”), which are easy to answer, and gradually moved on to more complex activities such as an icebreaker (i.e, introducing another participant to someone else) and giving feedback in groups.

“1-min research presentation,” the main topic of the session, can be applied to real classes to “gain students’ trust by expressing the values and charms of the instructor’s research.” It became a precious opportunity for the participants to practice their presentation skills by receiving feedback on their presentations from the instructor and other participants, filming their presentations as an assignment, and reflecting on those videos by themselves. The instructor gave the following feedback to the whole class: “Even if you speak perfectly like an anchor, you cannot make the listeners understand the charms of your research.” It made me realize that, in classes, it is important for the instructors to create an environment where students can learn without feeling insecure by revealing themselves instead of trying to speak perfectly.

Categories
Information

[Sekido’s FFP Journal Vol 0] Introduction: What Is UTokyo FFP?

I am Sekido, a Project Researcher, coming from Sendai City to support “The University of Tokyo Future Faculty Program” (UTokyo FFP). I joined UTokyo FFP to learn about and share with everyone “Classes that students enjoy and truly learn from.”

UTokyo FFP is a course conducted by the instructor, Dr. Kayoko Kurita (Center for Research and Development of Higher Education, The University of Tokyo) for graduate students, postdocs, and young faculty members at The University of Tokyo. The goal of the course is to help them become “excellent researchers” and “excellent educators” at the same time by acquiring “skills in designing and conducting classes that allow active learning” and “attitudes and mindsets for improvement and inquiry in their teaching.”

The course is held for two consecutive periods every other week in the spring and autumn semesters. Twenty-five participants per class are carefully selected and work together as classmates to pursue what education is across their affiliations (i.e., regardless of which school they belong to or whether they are students or faculties). It is a “course to learn ‘how to teach at university'” consisting of eight sessions, where the participants learn about topics such as class design, syllabus, evaluation, microteaching, and a career path as a faculty member, through group activities in a practical and active manner.

I would like to share with you the atmosphere of the learning occurring in the classroom and what I realized through the classes.