-
1
“M”- ness and the Student ExperienceM-Level PGCE
ESCalate SeminarFriday March 2nd 2007
LJMU M-PGCE
Developing Reflective Professional Practice24 L3 Credits
Subject Pedagogy20 M Credits
LT & A20 M Credits
• Critical analysis of the subject in the curriculum
• Review of pedagogy
• Lit review and research proposal
• Project report
• Three reflective reviews following each phase of training•
Linked to QTT Standards and school experience
SEPT JUNEJAN
-
2
Issues Arising
Teaching and Learning• Developing an M level pedagogy•
Supporting students in developing M level academic
skills and expectations• Increasing level of independence of
students
Assessment• Defining M-levelness• Making assessment tasks
meaningful• Drafting assessment outcomes / criteria / descriptors•
Quality assurance through marking and moderation
Impact – Early Years PGCE
• Interview – group discussion on an article (trial 2007)
• Early induction day (July) – share expectations
• More taught sessions earlier on in course –encourage reading,
writing, thinking and engaging at M level
Nicola Whiteside
-
3
Impact – Early Years PGCE
• 12 hours contact time a week (plus tutorial support) –
structure enables time for reflection
• Schools – made aware of impact/benefits
Nicola Whiteside
Impact – Early Years PGCE
• Originally – two assignments for each module
• Now- one larger more in depth assignment for each
Nicola Whiteside
-
4
Impact – Early Years PGCE
• Assignments – student ownership
Moderation• Year 1- all double marked (only 20 on
course) and all sent to external• Year 2 – 10 double marked,
these sent to
external
Nicola Whiteside
Impact – Early Years PGCE
• Level 3 module – work at M level –assessed at Level 3
• Year 1 – focus on M level – 1 student achieved M level credits
but not QTS
• Year 2- all likely to achieve QTS but 1 not passed L and T
1
Nicola Whiteside
-
5
Module assessment information
• Two assessment components– Coursework: 30%: Poster
presentation focused on an
aspect of learners' conceptual understanding in the subject
(1500 words equivalent)
– Coursework: 70%: Critical analysis of an aspect of pedagogy in
your subject area (3500 words)
• Focus on poster presentation
Phil Duggan
The assessment task
• Produce an A0 poster on the following theme: How do you see
the role and nature of your subject in the defined curriculum?– How
do you consider the role and nature of your
subject in the curriculum? – How have your prior personal
beliefs and
experiences to date informed your perceptions?– What are pupils
and public attitudes towards
your subject, and how does this differ from your own?
– What are the critical readings/ literature reviews that have
informed your judgments at this stage, and why? Phil Duggan
-
6
Why a poster?
• Represents an attempt to broaden student experience of
assessment and it adds interest– The academic poster format
encourages a critical
evaluation and synthesis of varied material which is indicative
of ‘M’ level work.
– The incorporation of the students own perceptions in
correlation with the attitudes of other people adds an extra
element of original work.
• Challenged our own knowledge• Why not?
Phil Duggan
What makes an ‘M’level poster?
In an ‘academic poster’ we are looking for– How well does the
introduction establish the
importance of the topic and indicate which aspects of the topic
are being addressed?
– Has sufficient evidence relating to the question been
presented in the body of the poster?
– How well does this evidence relate to the most important
aspects of the question and how well organised is it organised?
– How good is this evidence in terms of its source and its
currency?
– To what extent is this evidence supported with appropriate in
text references to the literature and how reasonable is the
conclusion? Phil Duggan
-
7
What makes an ‘M’ level poster? (2)
– Overall, how well does the poster answer the question that was
addressed?
– Is there a properly presented list of references used as
sources of evidence?
– How appropriate is the amount of content presented in the
poster and how well is it displayed?
• Guidance given to students as to what constituted an
‘academic’ poster
Phil Duggan
Assessment
• Students asked to present their poster for 5 minutes to their
tutors (presentation not assessed)– Good opportunity for peer
assessment– Good opportunity to explain the concepts behind
their
poster– Good opportunity for staff to gauge the students
intentions
Phil Duggan
-
8
Finally: How well did it work?• Year 1: Assessment criteria
ratified by a variety
of external examiners, but a variable output from students and
varied interpretation of the assessment criteria by staff. Many
students unaware of target audience.– Many staff reported feeling
‘outside their
comfort zone’ and were apprehensive about moderation
• Year 2: a higher standard of output from students and a much
greater consensus as to the application of the assessment criteria
by staff – Most staff now regard the poster as their
favourite part of the assessment schedule
Research project literature SearchAnd Methodology
Informs teaching staff of trainees
current issues/concerns
Peer review develops awareness of wider pedagogic
issues to peer
Provides an opportunity for analyse of a TLA issue
Trainees replicateswork they ask of pupils
Peer reviewgeneratesdiscussion
Develops Masterslevel academic skills
increasingconfidence
Deborah Pownall
-
9
Subjects selected this year
• EMA and its influence on achievement targets
• Differentiation • Use of ICT by staff• WBL – student
perceptions• EMAs affect on
training organisations
• Learning styles and teaching strategies
• Using ICT to check short term learning
• Effective use of Interactive White Boards
• Classroom Behaviour management
Deborah Pownall
Peer Review: “It’s just cheap teaching, isn’t it?”
-
10
Peer Review Sessions1. Student lead workshops (10th Oct)
2. Poster presentation (31st Oct)
3. LTA proposal (19th Feb)
4. Teaching practice files(30th March)
“The first session was a really good way to get to know each
other and find out was everyone else can do.”
“The peer review sessions have been good, but it’s difficult to
be critical - you don’t want to upset anyone.”
“I didn’t know what to look for or what to write, but it was
helpful to see what other people think of your work.”
-
11
Refer to handout
“Very supportive and friendly atmosphere to present ideas.
Interesting to gain insight into other areas of enquiry to raise
awareness of our own teaching.”
-
12
“I found it useful to listen to people from similar research
ideas. This helped evolve my own proposal and offered new
questions.”
“[Being] allowed to present ideas and proposals to the group to
gain feedback and receive ideas that may not have been previously
considered.”
-
13
“Although I wasn’t looking forward to the presentation day, it
proved to be really useful. It was great to hear all the other
students’ ideas and plans, and to receive their individual feedback
on issues.”
Peer review is successful when:
•there is a clear agenda for giving feedback to each other
•students understand what they have to gain from the process
•there is trust between the members of the group
•there is good time management
-
14
What we have learnt:•A framework for feedback gives ‘permission’
to critique the work of others
•Peer review develops a supportive critical community
•Students’ ability to reflect upon their own work is enhanced
through peer review
[email protected]