GUNS,
GERMS,
& STEEL
A CLIL COURSE THAT PROMOTES
SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING
Cathrine-Mette (Trine) Mork
cmork@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp
Takamasa Kurogi
20191055@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp
Patricia Anne Yamaguchi
20191107@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp
Marin Kamimizu
20191032@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp
Juhee Lee
20191059@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp
Van Khao Vu (Tommy)
20191102@sky.miyazaki-mic.ac.jp

OVERVIEW
COURSE FLOW02
01
STUDENT VOICES
03
E-LEARNING TOOLS04

3
OVERVIEW

Class Breakdown 2020
• highest stream of MIC 2nd years
(average TOEIC score = over 700)
• 21 students
• 75% Japanese
• 25% from Korea, Cameroon, Vietnam
4
OVERVIEW

a) Students write their own summaries (+
analysis – if possible) on their Mahara
e-portfolio blog
b) Select students upload their
presentation work (vocabulary,
summary, discussion Q&A) to Eduflow
(peer evaluation software)
Select students (4 or 5) give simutaneous chaired presentations to small groups (x3
rotations):
1 – explaining vocabulary from their own summaires with example sentences
2 – presenting their own summary of the chapter
3 – leading a discussion generated by comprehesion questions & discussion questions
a) Students & teacher give
contructive feedback using a
rubric on Eduflow
b) Presenters acknowledge
feedback
c) All students complete & upload
self-assessment rubric for
their blog work to Eduflow
d) Students comment on each
other’s journals
a) Quiz on previous chapter
b) Teacher lectures, students
read model summary in pairs
Go to Day 1, repeat next chapter
OR
If unit is complete (4 units total), do
review activities (teacher’s Youtube
summaries, National Geographic
GGS documentary, bonus
materials)
AND/OR
Midtern / Final Exam
Day 1 Homework
Day 2 of Chapter XYZ
Day 2 Homework
Day 1 of Chapter XYZ
Day 3 (4,5…)
5
COURSEFLOW
START HERE

6
STUDENTVOICES
2) PATRICIA
how the chapter reports foster
self-directed learning
1) TAKAMASA
4) JUHEE
how chaired presentations
foster self-directed learning
format of chapter reports
3) MARIN
format of chaired presentations peer evaluation for presentations,
journals & rubrics, quizzes
5) TOMMY

7
CHAIREDPRESENTATIONREPORT

8
CHAIREDPRESENTATIONREPORT

9
CHAIREDPRESENTATIONREPORT

10
CHAIREDPRESENTATIONDAY

11
PEEREVALUATION(PRESENTATIONS)

12
SELFEVALUATIONRUBRIC(JOURNALENTRY)

13
SELFEVALUATIONRUBRIC(UPLOADTOEDUFLOW)

14
TOOLS
PROS:
• Clean, simple, easy-to-use interface
• MOOC-style navigation
• Has various options for displaying content
(can show PDF with or without download, for
example)
CONS:
• $$$
• Doesn’t offer all the features of Moodle
• More of a CMS than and LMS without
upgrades

15
TOOLS
PROS:
• All students already have access & know how to use
(connected to school Moodle)
• Teachers can provide access to each journal to
other students.
• Students can give constructive feedback to each
other.
• Open source & offers other features
• Potential for media-rich entries
• Countless journals & journal entries
CONS:
• Usually requires institutional setup and
administrative support to link to Moodle
• Teacher needs HTML knowledge to make
journals available to all students

16
TOOLS
PROS:
• Assynchronous test-taking possible
• Random ordering of items is possible
• Mobile-friendly, easy to use, linkable to LMS
• Results can be ordered my multiple categories
• Downloadable content, no login
• Multiple question types
CONS:
• No immediate feedback
• Not free
• Not embeddable
• No long-term analysics (no accounts)

17
TOOLS
PROS:
• Paperless
• Anonymity (or not) for peer assessment
• Mobile-friendly, easy to use, linkable to LMS
• Various pre-set “flows” as templates
• Extremely customizable by instructor
• Multiple question types
CONS:
• None so far
• Free for 3 x classes of 50 or fewer students

QUESTIONS?
18
終り
THANKS!