Well we're over half way there, placements are over and its just a downward slope of essays and portfolios until the end of the course.
I'm not sure whether anyone is still doing this log now that it has been assessed, but I thought I'd keep going as I find it a good way to vent to nobody in particular - my husband must be heartily sick of listening to ramble on.
Once again I got really frustrated with the workshop on Thursday. I spent a long trip to Traralgon and back trying to work out why I should have a different teaching philosophy for teaching chemistry than any other subject I might teach. I was going to send an email to ask for clarification, but in the end decided it wasn't worth it, I'll just end up going with the flow. However for anybody else in the group who was wondering the same thing (and didn't say anything - thanks a lot :-) ), here is the email I was going to send but never did...
---
Hi Deb,
I have just done a trip of my own – not as far as you – just three hours to Traralgon and back and rather than thinking about pleasant thoughts of the school holidays, mock interviews and the end of this course, I spent almost the entire time thinking about one issue from Thursday morning – you guessed it – ‘Why would I be a different teacher teaching chemistry than I would be a maths teacher?’
It’s really bugging me. So I went back to my teaching philosophy, portfolio pieces and I started to list all the things that I want to be as a teacher: enthusiastic, supportive, caring, varied, motivated and motivational.
Also what do I want to achieve?
Ø Job satisfaction
Ø Mutual respect
Ø A feeling of making a difference
Ø Educating students about the world around them regardless of whether they continue past year 10
Ø Teaching problem solving and life skills
Ø Ensuring that even if students leave school as early as possible they will still be functional members of the workforce and society
And how will I go about it:
Ø Trying to tie learning back to things that relate to the student
Ø Variety
Ø Encouraging students to make the most of their skills in demonstrating their understanding
Ø Demonstrating that I am there to help them achieve to their fullest potential
Ø Using as much of other areas of the curriculum as I can to make learning ‘real-world’ or interesting to students whose interest may not lie in science or maths – my interests are history, travel and IT.
So regardless of what subject I am teaching, the above lists will underpin how I go about teaching and the type of teacher I become.
One feature of my teaching is the preparation I do for each lesson, probably more in chemistry than maths because my content knowledge is weaker. However I would expect in a very short time this difference in content knowledge would disappear as I become more confident.
Perhaps part of my issue is that I do not necessarily see myself as a maths or chemistry teacher (maybe I will if I teach these subject for a while). At the moment my teaching goals are not that specific, and my focus has been with those students who will most likely get out of maths and science as soon as possible, and ensuring that they have a basic understanding of the world they are about to enter.
So with this chemistry portfolio looming, and your comments that seemed to imply that we will/should/must be a different teacher teaching chemistry than another subject, I am looking for clarification. Do you expect me to have a different philosophy for chemistry education than maths education? Should I have different goals? Does teaching chemistry require a different set of skills to teaching maths (I admit in chem there is a literacy issue, but this is also an issue in maths teaching)?
Any insights would be appreciated
Regards
---
so there it is. An outline of my philosophy and an argument as to why I don't think I should have a different philosophy.
If anybody happens to come across this I'd love to see your comments
Thanks for reading...
Monday, September 22, 2008
Thursday, August 7, 2008
EDF4403 Session4
Firstly to answer a question.
Yes the holes are getting bigger. When I first opened up the textbook in the first week of the semester, I realised how much extra content there now is in the course. I was cool with that realising I'd have to do a bit of reading get to grips with the new stuff and fill in the holes in my content knowledge. What I was not prepared for was the realisation that I have completely forgotten most of the content that I did study and which is still in the course. Therefore there is a definite feeling of the 'holes getting bigger'. I just keep reminding myself that if I learned it once, it should be easier a second time :-)
Now to session 4...
I am finding Venn diagrams more and more interesting for picking out students understanding (or misunderstanding) of a topic. I don't remember coming into contact with them until year 7 or 8, and then only in a mathematical setting. However I know my sons were using them as early as grade 1 to categorise everything from bodies in space to different habitats and carnivores and herbivores. I am only now realising how useful they can be in all sorts of situations.
But the main 'gem' I got from week 4 is the value of homework. How it is valued by both students and teachers. I think it may have been Keasty who said something along the lines that 'if a teachers makes it clear that something is valued then it is likely that students will come to value it'. I think this was in relation to what is/is not included on marking rubrics.
As a teacher if you want students to value the homework they do (so they continue to do it) and see the usefulness of it, then the teacher must show that it is of value. It happens all the time in tutorials for all subjects that homework is set and never revisited. Of course most people probably don't do it, but some do. The fact that invariably the tutor never asks for comments or discussion of the set task indicates the value placed on that task (to me). If there was truly value on the task, then surely it is worth 15 minutes of time in the next session? If time is too precious then what was the point of the task in the first place?
Week4 was to be the week when all groups were to present their unit of work to the class. I was quite disappointed that we did not get through all the groups as I would have like to have seen how each group went about the task. Yes I can look at it on Blackboard, but its not quite the same as it being shown in person.
I think the stated purpose of the task, the stressed deadline for the task and the amount of work that was required meant that more time should have been allowed for the presentations.
Please do not misunderstand my intentions here.
This is not a case of me bitching because now some groups have extra time to get their presentation together and are therefore at an advantage, and I do understand there are other things that we have to get through in a limited time. I am simply trying to understand how I can use the concept but avoid the pitfalls.
This is just an observation of a number of things:
- I like this sort of task, and am therefore likely to use it in my classrooms
- it is VERY easy to underestimate the amount of time required to present them
- it seems only fair to me that if a lesson is set aside to present the material, I make damn sure everyone presents.
- the value that I have placed on the importance of the task is not diminished by spending time on other things
- I can imagine a certain type of student who would get rather annoyed if they presented but others had to present in another lesson (perhaps the following week) as this in effect gives them an extension, and for an assessed task this could be seen as unfair.
This session made me think about how I would implement these sort of 'jigsaw' tasks within my own classroom, but it also got me to thinking about how many different interpretations there can be of a task.
Eventhough we only got through 4 they were quite different (to me they were anyway), in layout, structure, emphasis and interpretation of the reason for the task. Some gave the impression of working together, others the impression of working separately and then bringing the pieces together. I did think that it was important that class time was set aside to do some of this task. To me this did demonstrate that the task was valuable and I certainly appreciated that.
It made me think again about the value of the task, and how to ensure that students do not put a huge amount of effort into a task only to completely miss the main reason for doing the task in the first place. A task like this that may run for a few weeks is great, but for me if it was youger students in particular I would like to ensure I was monitoring their progress (perhaps submit a draft) to ensure they were actually covering what was important - again this isn't a bitch about how our task was carried out, just a comment on what problems I can see arising.
Yes the holes are getting bigger. When I first opened up the textbook in the first week of the semester, I realised how much extra content there now is in the course. I was cool with that realising I'd have to do a bit of reading get to grips with the new stuff and fill in the holes in my content knowledge. What I was not prepared for was the realisation that I have completely forgotten most of the content that I did study and which is still in the course. Therefore there is a definite feeling of the 'holes getting bigger'. I just keep reminding myself that if I learned it once, it should be easier a second time :-)
Now to session 4...
I am finding Venn diagrams more and more interesting for picking out students understanding (or misunderstanding) of a topic. I don't remember coming into contact with them until year 7 or 8, and then only in a mathematical setting. However I know my sons were using them as early as grade 1 to categorise everything from bodies in space to different habitats and carnivores and herbivores. I am only now realising how useful they can be in all sorts of situations.
But the main 'gem' I got from week 4 is the value of homework. How it is valued by both students and teachers. I think it may have been Keasty who said something along the lines that 'if a teachers makes it clear that something is valued then it is likely that students will come to value it'. I think this was in relation to what is/is not included on marking rubrics.
As a teacher if you want students to value the homework they do (so they continue to do it) and see the usefulness of it, then the teacher must show that it is of value. It happens all the time in tutorials for all subjects that homework is set and never revisited. Of course most people probably don't do it, but some do. The fact that invariably the tutor never asks for comments or discussion of the set task indicates the value placed on that task (to me). If there was truly value on the task, then surely it is worth 15 minutes of time in the next session? If time is too precious then what was the point of the task in the first place?
Week4 was to be the week when all groups were to present their unit of work to the class. I was quite disappointed that we did not get through all the groups as I would have like to have seen how each group went about the task. Yes I can look at it on Blackboard, but its not quite the same as it being shown in person.
I think the stated purpose of the task, the stressed deadline for the task and the amount of work that was required meant that more time should have been allowed for the presentations.
Please do not misunderstand my intentions here.
This is not a case of me bitching because now some groups have extra time to get their presentation together and are therefore at an advantage, and I do understand there are other things that we have to get through in a limited time. I am simply trying to understand how I can use the concept but avoid the pitfalls.
This is just an observation of a number of things:
- I like this sort of task, and am therefore likely to use it in my classrooms
- it is VERY easy to underestimate the amount of time required to present them
- it seems only fair to me that if a lesson is set aside to present the material, I make damn sure everyone presents.
- the value that I have placed on the importance of the task is not diminished by spending time on other things
- I can imagine a certain type of student who would get rather annoyed if they presented but others had to present in another lesson (perhaps the following week) as this in effect gives them an extension, and for an assessed task this could be seen as unfair.
This session made me think about how I would implement these sort of 'jigsaw' tasks within my own classroom, but it also got me to thinking about how many different interpretations there can be of a task.
Eventhough we only got through 4 they were quite different (to me they were anyway), in layout, structure, emphasis and interpretation of the reason for the task. Some gave the impression of working together, others the impression of working separately and then bringing the pieces together. I did think that it was important that class time was set aside to do some of this task. To me this did demonstrate that the task was valuable and I certainly appreciated that.
It made me think again about the value of the task, and how to ensure that students do not put a huge amount of effort into a task only to completely miss the main reason for doing the task in the first place. A task like this that may run for a few weeks is great, but for me if it was youger students in particular I would like to ensure I was monitoring their progress (perhaps submit a draft) to ensure they were actually covering what was important - again this isn't a bitch about how our task was carried out, just a comment on what problems I can see arising.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
EDF4403 Session3
Well firstly I have to reflect on the whole assessment marking stuff from session2.
Much of session2 was taken up with marking, and whether a numerical mark should be given for every assessment task or whether the focus should be on the feedback. I had come away willing to take all that on board and thinking that, as a teacher, I might try to wean the kids off the number and get them to concentrate more on the feedback and how they could improve.
However I recently got an assignment back with comments and essentially no mark...
Now the question I am asking myself is: what 'value' is the feedback. The teacher values feedback ( I know this) and is therefore more likely to put plenty in than the normal couple of words at the end. So is the feedback there to challenge me to think deeper, to push my boundaries that little bit more? Is the feedback there because I failed to cover important points or express myself clearly enough to the reader? Or is the feedback there simply to assure me - the writer - that my audience has indeed read the work and understood it.
My problem is that without a mark I have no idea. If it is the first scenario then presumably my work is of a high quality and the same level of thinking and research will get me a good mark next time. If its the second scenario then surely I need to know because I obviously need to improve. If its the last then the value of the feedback for all subsequent work is diminished and I still don't know whether my original output was of high quality, just acceptable or somewhere in between.
So I have sort of come back round to what was my original gut feel on the whole subject before the session 2 discussion - yes feedback is very important, but without that marking scale indication, it is very difficult to determine the quality of the work you produce.
Now on to session 3 - lab pracs.
Again the content knowledge evades me and my confidence in teaching anything other than general science to year 10 is shaken to the core. I am not the only one and at least I can get some sort of perverse reassurance from the fact that fellow students who are much more recently out of VCE or Bachelor courses are struggling with it too. Perhaps this is a sad indicator of the content knowledge of first year chemistry teachers... I hope not. I think there will be a hell of a lot of revision going on this summer!
I was quite surprised by Deb's comment (at least I think it was Deb) that kids don't really enjoy pracs. From the pracs I have taught or observed, the kids seem to enjoy getting some kit out, getting their hands dirty and actually doing something. Perhpas its the writing it up that takes the shine off.
I like the idea of some thinking questions at the start, however I am also aware of time constraints: if the prac is going to take 40 minutes, it would be unfair (and frustrating) to not allow enough time for the students to finish and double chem periods do not appear that often in timetables I have seen, and may not always coincide with the most approriate time to do a prac.
I desperately want to be able to implement some of the things we are learning into my lessons, but I feel there is something missing. I am not used to thinking or learning like this, and have not been 'taught' how to. I don't remember having lecture on how to plan an entire unit of work, how to be context based rather than content driven, how to make up interesting higher order thinking tasks around a topic. Yet this is what I am being asked to do. So I anguish over it, where to start, have I got enough context, does the question involve enough thinking? Will I get better over time - I certainly hope so.
Rather than increasing my learning I feel a bit like the holes in my learning are widening at the moment.
I will probably have more to add to this later...
Much of session2 was taken up with marking, and whether a numerical mark should be given for every assessment task or whether the focus should be on the feedback. I had come away willing to take all that on board and thinking that, as a teacher, I might try to wean the kids off the number and get them to concentrate more on the feedback and how they could improve.
However I recently got an assignment back with comments and essentially no mark...
Now the question I am asking myself is: what 'value' is the feedback. The teacher values feedback ( I know this) and is therefore more likely to put plenty in than the normal couple of words at the end. So is the feedback there to challenge me to think deeper, to push my boundaries that little bit more? Is the feedback there because I failed to cover important points or express myself clearly enough to the reader? Or is the feedback there simply to assure me - the writer - that my audience has indeed read the work and understood it.
My problem is that without a mark I have no idea. If it is the first scenario then presumably my work is of a high quality and the same level of thinking and research will get me a good mark next time. If its the second scenario then surely I need to know because I obviously need to improve. If its the last then the value of the feedback for all subsequent work is diminished and I still don't know whether my original output was of high quality, just acceptable or somewhere in between.
So I have sort of come back round to what was my original gut feel on the whole subject before the session 2 discussion - yes feedback is very important, but without that marking scale indication, it is very difficult to determine the quality of the work you produce.
Now on to session 3 - lab pracs.
Again the content knowledge evades me and my confidence in teaching anything other than general science to year 10 is shaken to the core. I am not the only one and at least I can get some sort of perverse reassurance from the fact that fellow students who are much more recently out of VCE or Bachelor courses are struggling with it too. Perhaps this is a sad indicator of the content knowledge of first year chemistry teachers... I hope not. I think there will be a hell of a lot of revision going on this summer!
I was quite surprised by Deb's comment (at least I think it was Deb) that kids don't really enjoy pracs. From the pracs I have taught or observed, the kids seem to enjoy getting some kit out, getting their hands dirty and actually doing something. Perhpas its the writing it up that takes the shine off.
I like the idea of some thinking questions at the start, however I am also aware of time constraints: if the prac is going to take 40 minutes, it would be unfair (and frustrating) to not allow enough time for the students to finish and double chem periods do not appear that often in timetables I have seen, and may not always coincide with the most approriate time to do a prac.
I desperately want to be able to implement some of the things we are learning into my lessons, but I feel there is something missing. I am not used to thinking or learning like this, and have not been 'taught' how to. I don't remember having lecture on how to plan an entire unit of work, how to be context based rather than content driven, how to make up interesting higher order thinking tasks around a topic. Yet this is what I am being asked to do. So I anguish over it, where to start, have I got enough context, does the question involve enough thinking? Will I get better over time - I certainly hope so.
Rather than increasing my learning I feel a bit like the holes in my learning are widening at the moment.
I will probably have more to add to this later...
Thursday, July 24, 2008
EDF4403 Session2
Another good morning.
Again its the discussions and HUGE variety of opinions and reasonings that make it interesting.
I'm not sure whether the whole assessment discussion was really what was due to be covered but it was extremely valuable. This is the main way that I pick up how other people would approach a topic. Some I agree with, some I really can't agree with, but the majority show that there is a huge variety of ways to approach a task and you don't have to teach the same way to every class in every lesson
I think at the end of the day variety is the key. Perhaps some tasks are better suited to not giving a final mark but offering plenty of feedback - gradually wean the students from their desperation for a number at the end of every test or assignment. Probably not a bad idea, and I have had my own issues with PGO subjects.
If I was to take one piece of information from this morning it would be Deb's comment of not giving marks out on the assessment but only providing feedback UNTIL the student has a one-on-one with the teacher - a nice mix of both worlds.
The movies idea was good, we covered a fair bit of this sort of thing in maths last year (it is amazing how many movies have maths buried deep in there somewhere), and I particulalry thought the idea of showing a video with either no sound or no vision particularly interesting. I reckon anything the keep the little darlings on their toes is good.
Naturally I found the creative writing task a challenge, but that in itself was interesting. Would I feel comfortable setting this sort of task? Moreso now that I've done it and realise that even if the words 'creative writing' send shivers down my spine, it can be a bit of fun. Of course without wanting to be 'mark centric' this was not a pass or fail task, and that took the pressure off. Would I want to set this sort of thing as a way of summatively assessing a topic of work instead of the good old exam, project or oral presentation? I don't think so. As a formative assessment to make sure we haven't lost anybody along the way - no problems. Again I like it because of it's 'out of left field-ness'.
I think it is important to remember though that in mixing things up and doing something different like creative writing, there is the danger of losing kids who do well (and understand not just remember) because all of a sudden one teacher takes them outside their comfort zone. How is the student who is used to 90%+ in every 'old fashioned' test they have ever taken going to react when all of a sudden they are confronted with a completely new type of assessment task or heaven forbid just get a pass or fail? Many kids (particularly accelerated students) are completely focussed on marks and competing, and marks are just as important to the parents. Do I want to be the only teacher (and a graduate teacher at that) at a school to push the boundaries of the education they are used to? I don't know whether I'm brave enough.
As to assessing creative tasks, I may be in the minority on my views I'm not sure. Yes I believe we are all teachers of literacy and numeracy, yes I will correct grammar, spelling, punctuation and give feedback on structure, but I would hesitate to deduct marks (again I don't want to be mark centric - I am talking of marks either public or private here) unless it was absolutely appalling or the task criteria specifically stated otherwise. My placment school last year was full of kids with very limited English and it seemed to be accepted by teachers that many of these kids do maths/sciences because in some ways it doesn't depend so much on language skills.
I was also uncomfortable with the notion of marking kids on their personal progress and improvement. If we are to teach using real life contexts then perhaps we should also judge work output with a similar real life context.
Finally the on-going homework of planning the topic of work. ...
I am amazed at how much new stuff is in the curriculum. I'll certainly learn a lot from doing the task, but I have difficulty in trying to ensure it is the context which drives the learning and not the content driving the teaching. Deb spent time explaining this to my group and she made it seem so easy - will I ever get there??
I usually have trouble scraping 200 words together on any one topic and here I am with over 700!
Again its the discussions and HUGE variety of opinions and reasonings that make it interesting.
I'm not sure whether the whole assessment discussion was really what was due to be covered but it was extremely valuable. This is the main way that I pick up how other people would approach a topic. Some I agree with, some I really can't agree with, but the majority show that there is a huge variety of ways to approach a task and you don't have to teach the same way to every class in every lesson
I think at the end of the day variety is the key. Perhaps some tasks are better suited to not giving a final mark but offering plenty of feedback - gradually wean the students from their desperation for a number at the end of every test or assignment. Probably not a bad idea, and I have had my own issues with PGO subjects.
If I was to take one piece of information from this morning it would be Deb's comment of not giving marks out on the assessment but only providing feedback UNTIL the student has a one-on-one with the teacher - a nice mix of both worlds.
The movies idea was good, we covered a fair bit of this sort of thing in maths last year (it is amazing how many movies have maths buried deep in there somewhere), and I particulalry thought the idea of showing a video with either no sound or no vision particularly interesting. I reckon anything the keep the little darlings on their toes is good.
Naturally I found the creative writing task a challenge, but that in itself was interesting. Would I feel comfortable setting this sort of task? Moreso now that I've done it and realise that even if the words 'creative writing' send shivers down my spine, it can be a bit of fun. Of course without wanting to be 'mark centric' this was not a pass or fail task, and that took the pressure off. Would I want to set this sort of thing as a way of summatively assessing a topic of work instead of the good old exam, project or oral presentation? I don't think so. As a formative assessment to make sure we haven't lost anybody along the way - no problems. Again I like it because of it's 'out of left field-ness'.
I think it is important to remember though that in mixing things up and doing something different like creative writing, there is the danger of losing kids who do well (and understand not just remember) because all of a sudden one teacher takes them outside their comfort zone. How is the student who is used to 90%+ in every 'old fashioned' test they have ever taken going to react when all of a sudden they are confronted with a completely new type of assessment task or heaven forbid just get a pass or fail? Many kids (particularly accelerated students) are completely focussed on marks and competing, and marks are just as important to the parents. Do I want to be the only teacher (and a graduate teacher at that) at a school to push the boundaries of the education they are used to? I don't know whether I'm brave enough.
As to assessing creative tasks, I may be in the minority on my views I'm not sure. Yes I believe we are all teachers of literacy and numeracy, yes I will correct grammar, spelling, punctuation and give feedback on structure, but I would hesitate to deduct marks (again I don't want to be mark centric - I am talking of marks either public or private here) unless it was absolutely appalling or the task criteria specifically stated otherwise. My placment school last year was full of kids with very limited English and it seemed to be accepted by teachers that many of these kids do maths/sciences because in some ways it doesn't depend so much on language skills.
I was also uncomfortable with the notion of marking kids on their personal progress and improvement. If we are to teach using real life contexts then perhaps we should also judge work output with a similar real life context.
Finally the on-going homework of planning the topic of work. ...
I am amazed at how much new stuff is in the curriculum. I'll certainly learn a lot from doing the task, but I have difficulty in trying to ensure it is the context which drives the learning and not the content driving the teaching. Deb spent time explaining this to my group and she made it seem so easy - will I ever get there??
I usually have trouble scraping 200 words together on any one topic and here I am with over 700!
Thursday, July 17, 2008
EDF4403 Session 1
I really enjoyed this session.
The main nugget that came out of the session for me was the discussion about the progression points and the fact that these are not the curriculum.
This was interesting for me for two reasons.
Firstly it related to discussions I have had with people previously about progression points and how students can be assessed against them. Deb’s point that if you teach to the progression points then it would be impossible allow for those students who had already grasped the main concept and were ready to move on, made it very clear to me the importance of the ‘curriculum continuum’ in relation to the progression points.
The second interesting point for me was how the concept of the progression points in VELS differs between subjects and how this difference could affect the way I teach.
The progression points in the mathematics domain seem to me to be a reasonable indicator of a students’ progress and would probably closely match the text books and the expected progression of learning. I can imagine it would be easy for a teacher used to using the progression points to drive teaching, to do the same in chemistry. Yet it is obvious that the progression points in the chemistry domain do not form a logical progression of chemistry learning (eg they seem to imply that learning content must come before learning context).
So the two most important ideas for my future learning were:
1) To be aware of the total curriculum in order to cater for all levels of learning in the classroom
2) Understand that my approach to one subject may need to be different to how I approach other subjects.
Since the start of this course I have always known that my chemistry content knowledge was weak. This was highlighted when going through the Chemistry Unit 1 and 2 textbook to find a topic to plan for our homework. The amount of extra content that is now in the curriculum is amazing and I am going to have to do some serious reading if I want to feel any sort of confidence in teaching any of this.
I don’t think I will ever be entirely comfortable with all the reflection stuff, but I think I probably was making it too complicated and trying too hard. I think if I just try to concentrate on the most importance pedagogical information that I get out of the sessions and explain why they were important and what I want to do with the information I might just get there.
The main nugget that came out of the session for me was the discussion about the progression points and the fact that these are not the curriculum.
This was interesting for me for two reasons.
Firstly it related to discussions I have had with people previously about progression points and how students can be assessed against them. Deb’s point that if you teach to the progression points then it would be impossible allow for those students who had already grasped the main concept and were ready to move on, made it very clear to me the importance of the ‘curriculum continuum’ in relation to the progression points.
The second interesting point for me was how the concept of the progression points in VELS differs between subjects and how this difference could affect the way I teach.
The progression points in the mathematics domain seem to me to be a reasonable indicator of a students’ progress and would probably closely match the text books and the expected progression of learning. I can imagine it would be easy for a teacher used to using the progression points to drive teaching, to do the same in chemistry. Yet it is obvious that the progression points in the chemistry domain do not form a logical progression of chemistry learning (eg they seem to imply that learning content must come before learning context).
So the two most important ideas for my future learning were:
1) To be aware of the total curriculum in order to cater for all levels of learning in the classroom
2) Understand that my approach to one subject may need to be different to how I approach other subjects.
Since the start of this course I have always known that my chemistry content knowledge was weak. This was highlighted when going through the Chemistry Unit 1 and 2 textbook to find a topic to plan for our homework. The amount of extra content that is now in the curriculum is amazing and I am going to have to do some serious reading if I want to feel any sort of confidence in teaching any of this.
I don’t think I will ever be entirely comfortable with all the reflection stuff, but I think I probably was making it too complicated and trying too hard. I think if I just try to concentrate on the most importance pedagogical information that I get out of the sessions and explain why they were important and what I want to do with the information I might just get there.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)