Fulya Log

Revision as of 00:52, 10 September 2014

--Fulya 00:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Article : The Interactions of teaching improvement. published by Kathleen T. Brinko [[1]]

The Interactions of Teaching Improvements
7:50pm – 8:30pm
9/9/14

• Instructional consultation (improve instruction via feedback)
• Evidence for efficacy of consultation
• No way for university people to consult with each other
• no the best instructional consultation

• phases of interaction
  • initial contact – first encounter between consultant and client
  • conference – extensive discussion between consultant and client
  • information collection – consultant gathers data to show the client
  • information review and planning session – the consultant shares the collected info with the faculty member
    • may trigger more interactions between consultant and client
    • effectiveness, how well the client and consultant utilized the opportunities of each phase
    • compatibility with one another, learn new perspectives about teaching – learning process and determine if the instructional consultation will answer questions at hand

• models of interaction
  • information transmission, medical health, mental health, program consultation and implementation, process consultation, advocacy consultation, acceptant, confrontation
  • product model – consultant = expert; client = seeker of expertise.
    • Client identifies and diagnoses problem and choose solution
    • Engage in expertise of consultant to produce solution
    • Client purchases what consultant has for sale
  • Prescription model (medical)– consultant = identifier, diagnose, solver of problems; client = receiver thereof
    • Relationship between doctor and patient
    • Consultant processes valid opinions and knowledge. Client accepts opinions or knowledge without question
  • Collaborative/process model – consultant = catalyst or facilitator of change; client = content expert
    • Partners, each have own expertise. Synergistic relationship
  • Affiliative model – consultant = instructional consultant and psychological counselor; client = seeker of personal and professional growth
    • Empowering client and solving personal problems that may be causing instructional problems
    • Client identifies and diagnoses and problems. Consultant accepts these perceptions. Client in control
    • Not common
  • Confrontational model - consultant = challenger or devil’s advocate; client = defender or accepter
    • Consultant confronts the client as a first step
    • Not recognized

• Dynamics of consultative interaction
• More than one type of consultative interaction
• Cannot predict just with demographics. Depends on dynamics

• Consultant – client dyad seen as a whole.
• Not just consultant’s style of interaction, need to consider the consultative style that takes affect between consultant and client

--Fulya 20:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Article : A Cognitive Apprenticeship Primer. published by Mel Chua [[2]]

Cognitive Apprenticeship
10:10pm – 10:30pm
9/8/14

• Definition: How people learn something by working with and observing others in a community
• Practice in the late 1980s and early 1990s
• Origin: education researchers inspired by anthropological observations of things such as building furniture or delivering babies
• cognitive apprenticeship – thinking about thinking
• traditional apprenticeship – physical skills
• humans learn in social manner and observing
• the practice of making one’s metacognition visible to learners in one’s community of practice
• metacognition – awareness and understanding of one’s own thought process
• cognition – the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience and the senses

• cognitive apprenticeship
  • modeling – perform task for students to see and understand (thinking out loud, slowing down and explaining intermediate steps)
  • coaching – watch student perform the task and give hints and feedback from the sidelines
  • scaffolding – help student perform the task (accomplishing the task together)
  • articulation – students think out loud
  • reflection – student compare their process to an expert’s process or a model of a good process
  • exploration – students encouraged to go out and tackle the process on their own with less and less help

• articulation and reflection disappeared (independent practice)
• exploration = fading
• left with modeling, coaching, scaffolding and fading.
• Goal is to develop metacognition and self-monitoring in students (ability of reflection in action)