Help with coursework please

[Night Train]

I have to complete a developmental reflection for my teacher training and I am a little confused by the 'question'.

4.2 DEVELOPMENTAL RELFECTION TWO

For your second reflection you are asked to separately consider both the teaching and learning strategies which you currently employ. Think in terms of their usefulness and for each category select one which springs to mind as being the most effective. Describe the approach at a) consider your own approach to learning at b) and then deconstruct these ideas under the headings which follow.

a) Describe one of the most effective methods of teaching that you currently use:




b) Imagine that you have to learn a difficult concept or skill. Describe what for you would be one of the most effective methods of learning that you could employ for your self.

Are the two categories mentioned 'teaching' and 'learning'?

Do I select one strategy for teaching and one strategy for learning?

Do I describe the approaches to both teaching and learning, or just one of them, in a) and then my own approach to learning in b)?

Then I am supposed to 'deconsruct' the ideas under the following headings.

Does that mean describe something under the approach of a) deconstructed as a) and b)and then describe somthing under the approach of b) deconstructed as a) and b)?




Or does that mean deconstruct a method of teaching I use under a) and then deconstruct my own method of learning (which is not necessarily how I teach) under b)?




Or does it mean deconstruct the same one method used under both a) and b) in terms of describing how I teach my students and how I would respond if I were the learner?

Or there are several more iterations of possibilities that the 'question' could illicit if I think about it.

I am confused.

 

[ttcycle]

It is badly written, is there anyone that marks your assessment that is able to clarify? I read the question as; think about how you learn ie theoretically or practically etc etc. Then apply your chosen learning style to how you would teach your students. However one of the things worth noting is that everyone learns differently. I think they're asking you to critique the pros and one of how you teach and how you address problems if people don't understand, I think.

 

[vernon]

I am just as confused as you. The question does not help by using a structure and numbering which adds to the confusion.

Unless the deadline is Monday I'd ask your tutor what they expect to see submitted.

 

[Night Train]

Thank you.
It is badly written and there is very little time to ask for formal clarification unfortunately.

It does ask for strategies I currently employ. But I don't employ any strategies that work well for me as I am not allowed to. I prefer a good quality lecture but I have to teach in short bursts with activities and games using lots of gimmicks.
With that in mind I couldn't follow a) and b) literally.

 

[Night Train]

The deadline is Wednesday (we were given this last Wednesday) but I have little time to do this before then as I will be busy using the weekday time to do a 2500word essay as well as lesson planning, teaching and observing other teachers and writing up the observations.

If I have to I will raise a query today and hope for a response early Monday.

 

[Arch]

I have to complete a developmental reflection for my teacher training and I am a little confused by the 'question'.



Are the two categories mentioned 'teaching' and 'learning'?

Do I select one strategy for teaching and one strategy for learning?

Do I describe the approaches to both teaching and learning, or just one of them, in a) and then my own approach to learning in b)?

Then I am supposed to 'deconsruct' the ideas under the following headings.

Does that mean describe something under the approach of a) deconstructed as a) and b)and then describe somthing under the approach of b) deconstructed as a) and b)?




Or does that mean deconstruct a method of teaching I use under a) and then deconstruct my own method of learning (which is not necessarily how I teach) under b)?




Or does it mean deconstruct the same one method used under both a) and b) in terms of describing how I teach my students and how I would respond if I were the learner?

Or there are several more iterations of possibilities that the 'question' could illicit if I think about it.

I am confused.

Ugh! What a question!

I think....

I would describe and deconstruct one teaching method at a) and describe and deconstruct one learning method at b) - these may or may not be the same technique - if they were the same, that could be highlighted (Ie the way you teach (or are required to teach) would suit people like you, similarly, if they differ that can be highlighted (your required teaching methods don't work for everyone), and you can say why.

With regard to the methods you use not being you ideal, that could be mentioned to - it says 'one of the most effective methods you use', so choose the best, even if it's not ideal, and mention any shortcomings as part of the deconstruction?

It seems that the important thing is to demonstrate that you clearly understand the learning and teaching processes, and where they go right, and wrong.

If it's possible, (its easier with an essay than this sort of question perhaps), it might be helpful to make it clear how you understand (or don't!) the question. Then if it doesn't fit the 'template' answer, the marker should see where any misunderstanding has occured, and give you credit for that. At least, I think that's what I would have tried to do when marking. Sometimes someone would clearly misunderstand the question, or occasionally do so deliberately in order to make best use of their knowledge, and produce a good answer to the wrong question. If it seemed accidental or down to bad wording, I'd give more credit than if they'd just turned the question into one they wanted to answer*...

(*I remember on the Mark Whitehouse Experience once, they joked about getting into an English exam and finding you'd read the wrong play. The way to get out of it was to write "In order to understand Hamlet's motivation, it's important to consider what he would have done if he'd been Scottish, and therefore Macbeth...." )

 

[Andy in Sig]

Derive your own take on what you think the questin means and prefix your answer with an explanation of that and point out that you have had to do it because the wording was so ambiguous. At least you will then be clearly answering the question even if you have had to redefine it yourself.

 

[steve52]

the question is so badley written, that it allmost qualifys as LOB
load of ??????? a prime example of why britain is falling behing the rest of the top nations

 

[Fnaar]

I have to complete a developmental reflection for my teacher training and I am a little confused by the 'question'.



Are the two categories mentioned 'teaching' and 'learning'?

Do I select one strategy for teaching and one strategy for learning?

Do I describe the approaches to both teaching and learning, or just one of them, in a) and then my own approach to learning in b)?

Then I am supposed to 'deconsruct' the ideas under the following headings.

Does that mean describe something under the approach of a) deconstructed as a) and b)and then describe somthing under the approach of b) deconstructed as a) and b)?




Or does that mean deconstruct a method of teaching I use under a) and then deconstruct my own method of learning (which is not necessarily how I teach) under b)?




Or does it mean deconstruct the same one method used under both a) and b) in terms of describing how I teach my students and how I would respond if I were the learner?

Or there are several more iterations of possibilities that the 'question' could illicit if I think about it.

I am confused.

What a cr~p question.
I read it as this:
Consider one of your strategies for learning. Write about it at a abd b.
Also do the same for a teaching strategy.
Then pour yourself a nice cold beer and think about something else!

Don't do as I did years ago when taking a PGCE and use my final essay as a chance to say how truly awful the course was (true) I failed that essay, but if felt good! I had to re-write, spouting all the mumbo-jumbo required, and passed.

 

[Fnaar]

I hate all the 'reflection' stuff anyway... that's for girls.

I'd rather just get on with it.

 

[yello]

Are the two categories mentioned 'teaching' and 'learning'?
I think so, yes.

Do I select one strategy for teaching and one strategy for learning?
That'd my my take on it.

Do I describe the approaches to both teaching and learning, or just one of them, in a) and then my own approach to learning in b)?
I'd say both approaches.

Then I am supposed to 'deconsruct' the ideas under the following headings.

Does that mean describe something under the approach of a) deconstructed as a) and b)and then describe somthing under the approach of b) deconstructed as a) and b)?

I personally think your above interpretation of the question is correct, though I'm not sure I follow your presentation of the answer.

I think the question is clumsy and open to interpretation BUT my take....

I think the question is asking you to show your abilities to reflect, to deconstruct what it is that your are doing. I would demonstrate this by taking your favourite teaching method AND your favourite learning method and addressing both from both teacher and learner perspective.

That gives 4 'sections';

- favourite teaching method as teacher
- favourite teaching method as learner
- favourite learning method as teacher
- favourite learning method as learner

Address each section in the two categories;
a) Describe one of the most effective methods of teaching* that you currently use:
b) Imagine that you have to learn* a difficult concept or skill.


(*Note that for my interpretation to work, you have to swap the word 'teaching' with 'learning', and 'learn' with 'teach', when you come to address the other side of the equation but, for me that's implicit.)


I think you're being asked to explore the other perspective in the teacher/learner relationship for each of your preferred methods.

That'd be the way I'd break it down anyway. In truth, it probably doesn't matter too much if you don't quite deliver/format the answer in the manner the questioner expected. So long as you identify the nub of the question and show you can address that. And I think you've interpreted the question sufficiently well to be able to do that.

 

[Yellow Fang]

I think it's asking the same question three times.

I have to complete a developmental reflection for my teacher training and I am a little confused by the 'question'.



Are the two categories mentioned 'teaching' and 'learning'?

Yes.

Do I select one strategy for teaching and one strategy for learning?

Yes.

Do I describe the approaches to both teaching and learning, or just one of them, in a) and then my own approach to learning in b)?

I think just teaching in a) and learning in b)

Then I am supposed to 'deconsruct' the ideas under the following headings.

Does that mean describe something under the approach of a) deconstructed as a) and b)and then describe somthing under the approach of b) deconstructed as a) and b)?




Or does that mean deconstruct a method of teaching I use under a) and then deconstruct my own method of learning (which is not necessarily how I teach) under b)?

This option I think.

Or does it mean deconstruct the same one method used under both a) and b) in terms of describing how I teach my students and how I would respond if I were the learner?

Or there are several more iterations of possibilities that the 'question' could illicit if I think about it.

I am confused.

You could make a start though and ask for clarification on Monday.

 

[Night Train]

Thank you all, I have tried a few versions and will leave it for the time being and come back to it later to see if any make sense.

I have emailed my tutor and one other student from another college. Hopefully something I have writen so far will be usable.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I somehow doubt that a lot of ''relfection'' (sic) went into the writing of that question

 

[Arch]

Thank you all, I have tried a few versions and will leave it for the time being and come back to it later to see if any make sense.

I have emailed my tutor and one other student from another college. Hopefully something I have writen so far will be usable.

I'm sure it will.

The important thing is that you are able to identify and explain the methods and so on. If the information is there, and you've clearly demonstrated that you understand the issues, the detail of structure is less important (assuming you don't just write it as a stream of consciousness or something).

I think people who set questions should have to have them tested, or proof read by a layman. Just like the people who write manuals for phones or tellies or anything. If it can't be understood, write it again. When I was doing the PhD we each had to do a seminar to the whole department, and archaeology is a very wide ranging subject in terms of styles, and a good student is one who can make stats explicable to a historian, or vice versa.