Asp2013

249 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
249
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • How many of you use: clickers, think pair share, peer instruction, or some student polling technique during class? How many of you use small group activities? How many of you teach labs or discussions? How many of you have discussions will individual students during class? This observing protocol will give you detailed information on what types of interactions you are having with your students, and what percentage of class time you are devoting to each one.
  • First version of the RIOT ran on expensive software. Andrew here re-wrote the program to work on google app engine, and it’s now free for everyone to use. Well, it’s free for you and ALMOST free for us. Andrew will now show you how it works. Imagine that you are walking into the classroom of a colleague, and you
  • Tell participants they can follow along
  • Did not observe the lecturers at all, data is from DLs
  • Handout
  • Handout
  • Do any of you do educational research?
  • Switch this with next slideMake a web app, I pad
  • What is striking about this is that there don’t seem to be ‘categories’ of TAs. They really exhibit a spectrum of behaviors
  • Arrange better (maybe two slides)titleThe point I’m trying to get across in this data, is that TAs do all kinds of things in this classroom that was developed to be an interactive engagement classroom.Determine what is motivating instructors to lecture during the interactive engagement pieces and ignore their students, and we need professional development for that.
  • The point I’m trying to get across in this data, is that TAs do all kinds of things in this classroom that was developed to be an interactive engagement classroom.\
  • Asp2013

    1. 1.   To connect to the internet:  If you have a laptop or tablet and a gmail account visit: http://sjsuriot.appspot.com/  Sign in with your gmail account  We will be using this application during part of the workshop  Don’t have a laptop or tablet? No problem! You can still fully participate. Welcome!
    2. 2. R.I.O.T. (Real-time Instructor Observing Tool) Provides meaningful classroom evaluations. ASP 2013 San José State University Cassandra Paul Andrew Reid
    3. 3.   Courses using Interactive-Engagement techniques have been shown to improve instruction. (Hake 1998; Crouch & Mazur 2001; Prather et al. 2009; and many others)  Many classroom observation protocols are developed for researchers/evaluators to use, and not for instructors. (Examples: Active-Learning Inventory Tool, Amburgh et al. 2007; Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol, Sawada et al. 2002)  A poor ‘score’ on a protocol can cause a negative overall evaluation experience for the instructor.  The UC Davis Physics Education Research group wanted to make an observing tool that:  Was easy for instructors to use  Gave instructors lots of data on their classroom  Let instructors make their own judgments on how to change Motivation
    4. 4.  Real-time Instructor Observing Tool  UC Davis team developed RIOT  Categories created for easy coding  Instructors see a visual representation of data collected in their classroom  No video  RIOT data can be discussed in an professional development environment, consultation or private reflection Clarifying Instructions Explaining Physics Listening to Question Closed Dialogue w/students Open Dialogue w/ students Open Dialogue with Ideas Passively Observing Students Actively Observing Students Checking Homework Out of Room Fixing Apparatus Not Interacting/Reading Chatting with Students *West, E. A., Paul, C. A., Potter, W. H., Webb, D. Variation of instructor-student interactions in an introductory interactive physics course Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., Vol. 9 (March 2013)
    5. 5.   Computerized Classroom Observing Protocol  Observer watches class  Clicks icons pertaining to interaction taking place  Report is auto-generated at the end  Designed to be used by and for instructors to inform teaching  Interaction categories are (relatively) easy to interpret  Initially developed for Physics TAs at UC Davis  Also used as research tool*  Little training required  After today you should be ready to go!  (More training required if using RIOT for research purposes.) Real-time Instructor Observing Tool *West, E. A., Paul, C. A., Potter, W. H., Webb, D. Variation of instructor-student interactions in an introductory interactive physics course Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., Vol. 9 (March 2013)
    6. 6.  Outline  Intro  Using RIOT:  How to make observations  How to download and view results  Interpreting RIOT reports:  Small groups: Look at example data from courses  Whole class discussion: group findings and applications  Identifying Interactions:  Practice coding
    7. 7.  Using RIOT
    8. 8.   http://sjsuriot.appspot.com/ R.I.O.T Application
    9. 9.  Clarifying Instructions Explaining Physics Listening to Question Closed Dialogue w/students Open Dialogue w/ students Open Dialogue with Ideas Passively Observing Students Actively Observing Students Checking Homework Out of Room Fixing Apparatus Not Interacting/Reading Chatting with Students Time in minutes  TA is Interacting w/ Whole Class TA is interacting w/ Group 1 TA is interacting w/ Group 2 TA is not Interacting Sum of all Group rows TA is interacting with individual R.I.O.T. OUTPUT EXPLAINED BY ROW TA is interacting w/ Whole Class during time when students are in small groups
    10. 10.  Interpreting RIOT Reports
    11. 11.  CLASP COLLABORATIVE LEARNING THROUGH ACTIVE SENSE-MAKING IN PHYSICS 2 pieces of CLASP curriculum Time spent in class per week: Interactivity: Number of Students: Instructors: Lecture 1x 80 minutes (25 min Quiz) (sometimes) Peer-Instruction ~150 students ( x2 per course) Usually faculty, sometimes lecturer or advanced grad Discussion- Lab 2 x 140 minutes Series of interactive activities spliced with whole class discussions 25-30 students (x11 per course) The vast majority are grad students.
    12. 12. Sodium 7A DLM 17 3/12/2008 Silicon 7A DLM 17 3/11/2008 Clarifying Instructions Explaining Physics Listening to Question Closed Dialogue w/students Open Dialogue w/ students Open Dialogue with Ideas Passively Observing Students Actively Observing Students Checking Homework Out of Room Fixing Apparatus Not Interacting/Reading Chatting with Students
    13. 13. WC SG SGWC Lithium 7B DLM 3 1/15/08 Titanium 7B DLM 3 1/14/08
    14. 14.
    15. 15.
    16. 16.  Identifying Interactions
    17. 17.   Dr. Tom Fleming – University of Arizona  intro astronomy class  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIa5hjVAAD8 &list=PL19CE26ACB414B35B Lecture Clip
    18. 18.   Learning Assistant Resource Videos  University of Colorado Lab/Discussion Clip
    19. 19.  Benefits of RIOT  Coarse measurement allows for lots of observations  Output gives you an illustrative view of classroom (you can learn a lot of things about the instructor in seconds, our eyes respond to patterns)  Excellent TA training tool  Not as invasive as video tape  instructors more likely to allow (invite!) observations (objective & anonymous)  Easier to act naturally in front of  Students not video taped (IRB exempt)  Can be modified to measure MANY things  Instantly turns qualitative data into quantitative data for statistical analysis
    20. 20.  Weaknesses of RIOT  Not a replacement for video tape  Coarse observation  Info on quality lost (in current form)  Only gives you info regarding what TA is doing (student info is lost)  You can’t go back and re-analyze interactions  (Next step to see if Active Observing is a true indicator for student achievement is to see what happens before and after active observing)
    21. 21.  Future uses for RIOT  Professional development tool (faculty love data!)  Organizer for field notes (new feature!)  Small Group analysis (identifying common patterns in student discourse)  Look for issues with the curriculum (for example: places where instructors explain a lot)  As a ‘tag’ for videotape data  PRIME grant: Student Participation Observing Tool (SPOT)
    22. 22.  Thank you! Cassandra Paul cassandra.paul@sjsu.edu Andrew Reid Agreid35@gmail.com RIOT: sjsuriot.appspot.com/ Slides and more info at: www.sjsu.edu/people/cassandra.paul/RIOT/
    23. 23.  Extras
    24. 24.  24 Talking At Students Talking With Students Observing Students CLASP A Observation 1
    25. 25.  25 Talking At Students Talking With Students Observing Students CLASP A Observation 1
    26. 26.  26 Talking At Students Talking With Students Observing Students CLASP A Observation 1
    27. 27.  27 Talking At Students Talking With Students Observing Students CLASP A Observation 1
    28. 28.  28 Talking At Students Talking With Students Observing Students CLASP A Observation 1
    29. 29.  SMALL GROUP TIME 29 Instructors spend between 5% and 50% of their small class time not interacting with their students.
    30. 30.  Instructors spend between 1% and 75% of their whole class discussion time explaining to their students. WHOLE CLASS TIME 30
    31. 31.  RIOT Findings  There is a large variation in the range of instructor- student interactions between instructors
    32. 32.  THE AMOUNT OF TIME SPENT IN WHOLE CLASS DISCUSSION VARIES IN EACH OF THE THREE SEGMENTS OF THE COURSE. THE REGULARITY OF CERTAIN INTERACTIONS, LIKE DIALOGUING, VARIES IN EACH OF THE THREE SEGMENTS OF THE COURSE
    33. 33.  Carbon7C2008Carbon7B2009
    34. 34.  RIOT Findings  There is a large variation in the range of instructor- student interactions between instructors  The curriculum affects how instructors spend their time in class.  By changing the materials, developers can affect the amount of time instructors spend interacting in certain ways
    35. 35.  Do interactions have impact on student achievement?
    36. 36.  RIOT Findings  There is a large variation in the range of instructor- student interactions between instructors  The curriculum affects how instructors spend their time in class.  By changing the materials, developers can affect the amount of time instructors spend interacting in certain ways  There is evidence that suggests that certain instructor interactions are correlated with student achievement (active observing in particular)
    37. 37.  Student Participation Observing Tool 39

    ×