Two years down the road –
student ownership of GLOW…
giving it back to the learners
Teachers have to let go – we don’t have to be in control !
Why do we always try to overcomplicate things ?
Let the students change it around and take ownership.
“Stop talking miss – you’re stopping us from learning”
(adapted from Prof. Stephen Heppell 2006 conference presentation
http://rubble.heppell.net/creativeJISC/default.html)
GLOW Learn has been ill thought out and is too impersonal.
“Teaching by machines” went out with behaviourism
• Students worked in small groups
• Set up GLOW groups
• Planned and taught four ‘lessons’
• Mix of tasks/formats
• Peer a...
At times, organised chaos but very soon,
method from the madness
Did the lights stay on ?
• 14 % attainment gain
• 32% module on module
• Time on task ratio 10:1 ( 5:3 w/o)
• Out of hours...
The future…
• GLOW unsustainable in it’s present format
• Huge issues with QA preventing sharing of
resources
• GLOW Learn...
Two Years Down The Road – Student Ownership
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Two Years Down The Road – Student Ownership

558 views

Published on

Giving ownership of GLOW to the students - the jigsaw classroom approach

Published in: Education
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
558
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Two Years Down The Road – Student Ownership

  1. 1. Two years down the road – student ownership of GLOW… giving it back to the learners
  2. 2. Teachers have to let go – we don’t have to be in control !
  3. 3. Why do we always try to overcomplicate things ?
  4. 4. Let the students change it around and take ownership. “Stop talking miss – you’re stopping us from learning”
  5. 5. (adapted from Prof. Stephen Heppell 2006 conference presentation http://rubble.heppell.net/creativeJISC/default.html)
  6. 6. GLOW Learn has been ill thought out and is too impersonal. “Teaching by machines” went out with behaviourism
  7. 7. • Students worked in small groups • Set up GLOW groups • Planned and taught four ‘lessons’ • Mix of tasks/formats • Peer assessed/ evaluated
  8. 8. At times, organised chaos but very soon, method from the madness
  9. 9. Did the lights stay on ? • 14 % attainment gain • 32% module on module • Time on task ratio 10:1 ( 5:3 w/o) • Out of hours learning enhanced • Very labour intensive – is this investment in attainment cost-effective when set against AiFL ? • Funding and hardware are increasingly becoming issues
  10. 10. The future… • GLOW unsustainable in it’s present format • Huge issues with QA preventing sharing of resources • GLOW Learn and the time factor • Out of date and unintuitive – “The VLE is dead – Long live the Wiki” • Project management and classroom credibility of national team approach

×