Reflective Learning and Teaching

May 17, 2017

I would like to share a good news with you.

I have received a Teaching Learning Development Grant (G0217), as the Principal Applicant (PA), from the Institute of the Scholarship on Teaching and Learning in the Disciplines (ISTLD), SFU, on May 24, 2017.  This is the second grant I have received from the ISTLD two year in a row.

I have received the first grant from ISTLD in the Summer 2016 (G0157) and conducted a “Teaching Inquiry” (the muddiest points tool) using a paper and pencil method in an upper level undergrad course (HSCI 481: Principles of Health Program Evaluation) with 24 students.  The findings revealed that the Teaching Inquiry using the muddiest points tool was effective in enhancing student learning and improving instructor teaching. The findings also revealed that the tool has potentials to implement in larger classes and online administration.

This second project will build on the previous project. In the Summer 2017, the PA will jointly be teaching a health science entry level course (HSCI 130: Foundations of Health Sciences) with another instructor, Rochelle. Rochelle will teach HSCI 130 course in Burnaby (about 100 students enrolled) and Tun Myint will teach the same course in Surrey (over 50 students enrolled) using the same course materials, readings, and classroom assessments. Rochelle has not used the muddiest points tool before.

The differences of the second project from the previous project will be:

  • Online administration of the muddiest points tool
  • Other instructor with no prior application of the muddiest tool in her class
  • Administered in two larger lower level undergraduate courses simultaneously
  • Both instructors will keep a journal which includes how they responded to students’ muddiest point assessment (i.e., what they did in class after reading muddiest point responses, how they changed materials or assignments because of muddiest point responses)

The applicants would like to know:

  1. Will online administration make it possible for instructors to use the muddiest point assessment tool in the same way, as was done with paper and pencil administration and smaller student numbers?
  2. How does the instructor new to the muddiest point assessment tool view the usefulness of it?
  3. What are the concepts (muddiest points) most frequently mentioned by students in both course sessions?
  4. Do different instructors receive the same or different muddiest points from students?
  5. How did the two instructors respond to the student responses to the muddiest point assessment?
  6. How do students perceive the usefulness of the weekly assessment?

The duration of the project is 6 months (May to October, 2017).  Final report will contain:

  • List of muddiest points identified by students a) separated by course, b) frequency within each course, c) frequency across courses
  • Summary of student responses to question about usefulness of the muddiest point assessment to their learning.
  • Summary of instructor teaching journals (weekly entries across the semester) with attention to points in question table. This will be two separate summaries – one for each instructor.
  • Instructors reflections muddiest points identified by students and student perception of usefulness
  • Instructor recommendations for continued use of muddiest points

 

If you are interested in how I conduct the project, what assessment tools used, and how data are collected and analyzed, please contact me (tun_myint@sfu.ca or 778-881-8167).  I will share more information as the project progress.

cc-by-nc

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s