Activity 7.1

[AliSheph]

I have posted a design for peer-support at http://alicesadventuresinedtech.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/octel-week-7-activity-7-1-designing-learner-support-peer-support/

Comments/reviews would be welcomed – it’s pretty rough as it stands but time is limited (is anyone else doing exam marking atm!?!?!!)

[ElizabethECharl]

Ali

I had a look at your blog and these are my first thought on it I have added my comments under the following headings:

If the design / approach or mix of approaches is appropriate for the given context

I would agree that the approach is appropriate for the given context of enabling peer support amongst small groups who are reticent to comment/articulate their reasons to the group although they obviously understanding the grading criteria.  Using the REAP criteria as a scaffold for the proposed design is solid way forward and I can see why you have adopted this approach.

Aspects of the design you think work particularly well

The setting of ground rules, (safe environments) and demonstrating how you would do it, so they can all see the process in action, is a good design point.  That coupled with the explanation of the process and what is expected of them, having seen you doing it (modelling master – apprentice) reinforces and clarifies what is required, why, and how it feeds through to the next step.

It may be tricky but the idea of integrating self-review by getting the learner to reflect and apply the criteria to their work and submit a summary so that you can see that they have done this is a seamless integration of good practice.  The fact that some already submit drafts of their work to you should mean that this is less of major issue. You could use that to promote why this additional step will feed forward and put that in place first (monitoring how it goes) before attempting to get them to start commenting on each other’s work. That being said it will not seem so large an ask if they are already critiquing their own work.  Again it will require explanation and how this will help them as they progress on the course.

At least one suggestion for improving the design

You indicate that signpost for quality might be an issue  as these will be oral presentation – perhaps they can be recorded and you provide feedback in a similar format (?) as well as using wiki or discussion boards.

Perhaps you could as the course progresses get the students to go back to these and add links to resources or other support materials that they have come across that helped them with a similar issue and or might help somebody who was having similar difficulties to improve the quality of their work?

Resources they might refer to in order to improve or extend the design.

http://lebioscience.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/audio-feedback-evidence-is-mounting.html

http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/engaging-by-talking-agile-and-effective.html

[AliSheph]

Thanks for your feedback, Elizabeth – appreciate the time and effort you have put in to this.

I think you have a really good point regarding self-review – I think it will be a good opportunity to ask the students to use the criteria on their own draft work – the chronology will be that that happens after this peer review activity, but I think that could work well as a synthesis of what they have learned. Also like the idea of recording the verbal comments to reflect on quality of review. Will explore the links you have given me as well. Thanks!

[AliSheph]

PS My original studies were in biosciences, so it’s nice to see my old discipline leading the way in educational practice 🙂

[ElizabethECharl]

I just came across the following and immediately thought of your course:

Vokis : http://edudemic.com/2013/03/how-to-become-a-better-presenter-by-using-voki-avatars/

 

[James Kerr]

Self-review / self-assessment:  can illustrate a learners confidence level in their work or abilities.  Can help peers identify areas around the topic, adjacent to, not tangential, that might be beneficial to the peer learner.

[jimpettiward]

Hi Ali,

I’d echo Elizabeth’s comments about applying what they learn to their own work – always a good idea where possible.

One thing I’ve done in the past is to have small groups of students look at the same example answer/paper from previous assessment cohort, then give each of them 2 or 3 criteria and ask them to try to find examples of that criteria being met (or not) in the work. They then present their findings to others in the class. I found that this helped reassure me that they had really understood (and helped others understand) the criteria being used to assess their work.

BTW – are we really down to just this small group of Octelites, or is there another space somewhere that I’m missing??

 

[David Jennings]

Just to answer your last question, Jim: if you look at the spread of activity across the forums, you’ll see that people are still contributing to Weeks 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. We/I tried to encourage people to focus on the current week and come back to earlier weeks later, but that was just advice, not regulation, and many people have other ideas. That’s fine – whatever works for them. But it does mean that, in the snaking 26-mile marathon of ocTEL, people are spread out from about the 6 mile point to the small leading pack at around 20 miles in…

[Jillian Pawlyn]

David, and Jim,

I am one of the snails (not snake) I intended to keep to the week and then step back to catch up but each weeks the activities build on what has come before so I had to step back again.

I am now caught up to week 7 and you are in week 9 (eek)

[Author]

Posts