Reflective Statement
Me: [whine] I have my Reflective Statement due tomorrow for the internship. [/whine]
Husband Dearest: So give them a mirror.
Following co-intern David's lead, I've decided to blog my internship reflection. This is not just because I'm an attention junkie, but also because... um.... No, actually, that's it. For those of you reading this: feel free to comment, discuss, question.
The reflective statement is supposed to cover thoughts on the internship and teaching so far, as well as the recently completed WebCT project. My statement is divided into a few sections to help me arrange my thoughts, and to hopefully make it a bit easier to follow as well. I think I should warn you now that the following doesn't necessarily involve the more formal tone of a hard copy reflection, but the content is all there.
Allan/Tama: I'm guessing this will exceed 1500 words, mainly because there will be some general information about the program thrown in for those not quite so familiar with it. Given that this is a public forum, I've also decided not to use any names of people or units, so I'm having to describe things in more roundabout ways.
***
Follow-up sessions
The 24 interns meet up every couple of weeks for a follow-up session. The sessions start with a half an hour of general discussion about teaching traumas, followed by discussion/ presentations/ group work on a set subject. I know a few people have felt there have been too many sessions, too many hours lost from research etc. However, I haven't really had a problem with the frequency of the meetings. I can't say I think we've necessarily gained the same degree of benefit from each session, and this is possibly because attendance has tapered a bit towards the end of the semester.
I think the most valuable element of the follow-up sessions, and the internship as a whole, is the fact that you get to make connections with 23 other postgrads. The first half hour of discussion (which often continues over drinks and nibblies afterwards) is generally more interesting than the planned content for the day. However, I did start to feel a bit burnt out about "reflection" fairly early on, particularly once the WebCT project had started. In a typical week I would talk to my learning partner about teaching experiences, then share the same experiences again with people in my eLearning group. By the time the follow-up session came around I'd either achieved inner peace on the topic or found myself repeating the same anecdote of tutorial chaos for the third time to an audience of whom a quarter had already had enough of me and my repetitive worries.
The reason teaching is so time-consuming and so thesis-postponing is the fact that it is dynamic. You need new material prepared each week, you need to mark all essays by a specific date, you have staff meetings to go to, you have specific consultation times, you have admin deadlines to meet. I'd like to see the follow-up meetings focusing on the issues we have to cope with during the course of the semester, for example strategies on balancing research and teaching, what to do with SPOT tests (I'll talk more about these later) and so on. To be honest (as the point of this exercise is) I'd also appreciate information on the specifics of applying for academic jobs. So far I've been lucky enough to be invited to do teaching jobs, so I'd like to know what sort of a procedure to prepare for when that isn't the case. How does one apply for a job at a university? What's the interview process like? What does a teaching (and research) portfolio actually look like?
Tutorials
This semester I taught one tutorial group in a unit I'd studied myself as a first-year student. I had also taught in the same unit last year. I had my tutorial plans from last year, but I wanted to try a different format this year, so I didn't really rely on last year's material. Basically, last year I ran the tutorials as large group discussions, with several questions prepared to keep discussion going. I'd organised two tutorials that involved small group work in the form of mind maps, and my SPOT responses for the year mentioned the small group work was the best aspect of the tutorials, so I wanted to make the small group work the focus this time.
I tried a few different things along the way, but I found that having students dicsuss the general topic in pairs first, then in small groups lead to livelier discussions overall even in following weeks. I was also pleased to turn up to tutorials to see my group chatting and laughing together before the start. Because it's my blog, I'll claim the frequent small group and pair discussions helped them get to know each other better and feel comfortable talking to each other socially as well. :-)
Lecture
As everyone else, I had my nervous tremors about the lecture. I wasn't really that concerned about speaking in public - I just didn't want to make any stupid mistakes. In the lead-up to the lecture I managed to convince myself many times over that I'd accidentally make something up and tell nothing but lies in the entire lecture. And if that wasn't bad enough, the lecture would be recorded! All my mistakes would be there, in an easily-repeatable format (the unit has a pretty solid "WebCT presence")!
Fortunately the lecture went okay in the end - I didn't go over time (too badly), although I did talk very fast. I knew there were too many ums and stutterings, and trying to negotiate three different sets of notes (dot points, more fleshed-out notes and powerpoint slides) was far too confusing.
After the lecture my supervisor pointed out that although I maintained decent eye contact with the students, I favoured the audience of my left hand side. I realised there were two reasons for this. First, one of my students, who I knew was interested on the topic, sat to the left. Secondly, two co-interns sat to the right. I didn't want to deliver the lecture to them, or have their looks of pity throw me off, so I focused on the left. Lesson for next time: share the eye contact!
Feedback (Supervisor and Learning partner)
I've had several sources of feedback over the course of the semester. I've had proper meetings with my internship supervisor, who is also the unit coordinator, every second week. I also have a chat to her after each lecture, so I've been able to raise any issues early and regularly. She double marks all of my essays to make sure I'm looking for the right things, and she also came to two of my tutorials to see how that side of my teaching was going. We have had a couple of situations where we've realised our expectations didn't meet, mainly because I taught in the same unit under a different unit coordinator last year, and we did things slightly differently. I think we've managed to sort those issues out, though. Although it does demand more of me as well, I do think I'm very lucky in having a supervisor who does put a lot of effort into mentoring me.
Having the supervisor come to my tutorials was quite frightening. Fortunately it didn't really impact on how the group worked, and I was quite flattered when at the end of each tutorial she asked me whether she could use some of my material for her class. We have realised that we do have quite different styles: she prefers to be more in control of the discussions and make sure it's going in the right direction, whereas I tend to think of tutorials more as situations where students can learn from each other, and am generally happy to sit back a bit.
My learning partner has also been very helpful, not to mention inspirational. She gave her lecture several weeks before mine, and I was impressed at how brave she was: she asked the students to give her some informal written feedback on the lecture. I was so taken by how supportive the students were in their responses I did the same exercise in my lecture a couple of weeks ago.
I don't think I've been as much "value" for my learning partner as she has for me - I don't think I was able to give her very meaningful feedback for her lecture, while she had taken extensive notes, timed the lecture etc. I feel particularly bad about the fact that because I didn't type out my comments in full as soon as the lecture was over, I still have her evaluation sitting on my thumb drive as a draft with not much information on it.
The students' lecture feedback was very good to get, although it was a bit contradictory: some thought the lecture went at a good pace, others thought it was rushed, some liked the slides, some thought the slides were the worst part etc. The best aspect about the feedback was not so much what it actually said, but the fact that the students took the time to write it. Many of them wrote things like "well done!" and "good luck!" at the end, and were generally very encouraging. When you've been dreading saying stupid things or freezing up "on stage" it's good to know that they're not actually out to get you.
Feedback (SPOTS)
I conducted a SPOT test at the middle of the semester and one at the end. After I'd received the results (and comments in particular) for the first lot I made a point of discussing some of the recommendations with the students. I'd explain that we were doing a particular activity because some of the comments had mentioned it as a good one. I didn't want the students to feel they'd given their feedback just for the sake of it, I wanted to make sure they realised that what they'd said earlier was having an effect on how I was now planning tutorials.
Once I received my new graphs I was quite keen to compare my results from the two sets, but discovered that although I'd had the same questions both times, my first SPOT report didn't include the results for all the sections, so I'll need to have them rescanned. So, I can't really give a proper analysis of the changes.
My latest results are actually pretty good as far I can see:
4.64 (Item 803) overall, this teacher has been an effective instructor.
4.55 (Item 22) I have enjoyed attending the classes.
4.45 (Item 59) I have been encouraged to participate actively in class discussion.
4.45 (Item 87) I have been encouraged to think critically.
4.91 (Item 102) the teacher seems to have been well prepared for classes.
4.82 (Item 103) the teacher seems to have been well-informed on the material presented.
4.91 (Item 104) the teacher has shown enthusiasm for teaching the subject.
4.82 (Item 106) the teacher has been approachable.
4.82 (Item 216) a class atmosphere conducive to learning has been maintained.
However, my averages for items 22, 56 and 87 were lower this time around, so I'll see if the comments will shed some light on that. No "disagrees", though, and that's good.
The SPOT report says that for job applications you might want to address the SPOT results, but how? What does that actually mean? Do I need to keep a record of what I think lead to certain scores in particular year, or is the process more general ("my students think I'm enthusiastic and well organised")?
Getting the SPOT report and the averages is all very well and good for statistical analysis, but the comments are really the important part, so it would be good to get them earlier. Given that midsemester SPOT forms are returned within a couple of days of the electronic summary I don't see why end of semester ones should be held over until after the exams.
Some of my favourite comments from the first round of SPOTS are:
I was also very pleased that some of the comments said they enjoyed the analytical discussions - last year one of my "needs improvement" comments was something along the lines of "we don't do enough in-depth analysis".
Past students, if you're out there: your comments are making a difference.
* I told you I was laissez-faire!
WebCT
The WebCT project involved a group of six interns creating an online learning module aimed at first year students. I'll talk about the team work aspects in the next section, in this one I'll focus on the technology itself.
I quite liked working with WebCT. I particularly liked tinkering with the Assessments tool. I knew nothing about WebCT before I started - or rather, I had used it, I just didn't know how to create things in it, or how it really worked. Still, I thought the basics were quite easy to pick up. When the HTML editor was working it was really no different to writing a blog entry or an email. I did have a go at figuring out what the codes for some formatty things were once when HTML editor wasn't working, but that was only when I was desperate not to do any real work.
I was frustrated about not knowing what was possible with the technology. When all of the groups presented theirs I was unnecessarily jealous of the groups who had managed to remove some of the link icons from the left hand side toolbar. Those icons had been annoying me all along, and I wanted our project to have looked as streamlined and user friendly! I was actually annoyed at myself for not having figured out that things like that could be done.
We talked about the project in some detail in today's follow-up seminar, and I agree that it's far too big a project as it is. I think it's a useful project, and for all its curses the hands-on aspect is very good, but I think it would work better and infuriate fewer people in a smaller scale. I liked the idea that next time around the focus could be on designing a smaller unit to complement face-to face learning, rather than a self-contained module on its own.
Team work (The Wondergrads!)
Overall, I enjoyed the team work side of the WebCT project, mainly because I liked all the people in my team. We met frequently, and we were in regular email contact. For the first few weeks of the project we were really quite lost, and had grand ideas about what the module would look like. Sadly, those ideas were out of our reach, and will remain so unless Industrial Light and Magic decides to sponsor the internship right about now.
We met at the Club to generally chat something vaguely internship- connected, but we didn't really make much progress. We'd schedule meetings at times when not everyone could make it, and we didn't set deadlines. We'd just agree to "talk about" or "show" what we'd done since the last meeting, but there was no real criteria set or followed. I think we were too concerned about being friendly and not offending anyone that we just wouldn't focus on actually making progress.
After the follow-up session on team work (and this was a session where the content really did have an impact) we all realised we'd been making some quite significant mistakes. One group member got our healing process started by sending out an email expressing some of his concerns, and we started to set some limits on ourselves. We never really became perfect at the whole thing: we still had meetings with little progress between them, and we weren't very good at just sitting down together and doing things without getting distracted. However, we did get a bit better towards the end, and we were more aware of our own progress.
I think we did quite successfully avoid the "one person doing all the work"-problem that seems to come up a lot in horror stories about team projects. We divided the project into six smaller modules at the very start, so even though we as a group didn't really get much done for stretches of time, the individuals did. Perhaps that's one thing to think about for anyone planning a group assignment: make sure team members have individual ownership over some aspect of the project, something that as a whole demonstrates their personal work but which still requires the full framework of everyone else's contributions to make sense.
***
Overall I've enjoyed the Internship, mainly because of the interpersonal connections it provides. I think it has enhanced my teaching, although I think it was also useful that I'd had some experience before starting as well. It meant I already had a bit of an idea as to what my classes could be like, and I'd gotten over the worst of my teaching-related anxieties before the start of the year.
I would recommend the program to other students, but I would also make it very, very clear that even though your teaching plan is calculated so that the hours you work won't conflict with your scholarship, that's only half of the story. The group work, the follow-up sessions and the research project take up far more time than that, and even though you know these projects are part of the internship when you apply, you don't have a clue as to how time consuming they can be.