/
When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT Profile in Mini-Studios When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT Profile in Mini-Studios

When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT Profile in Mini-Studios - PowerPoint Presentation

yoshiko-marsland
yoshiko-marsland . @yoshiko-marsland
Follow
362 views
Uploaded On 2018-02-25

When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT Profile in Mini-Studios - PPT Presentation

Matthew Wilcox Yuehai Yang and Jacquelyn Chini University of Central Florida This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grant DUE1246024  Ministudios Weekly 3 hour class in addition to introductory physics lecture ID: 635408

students profile student riot profile students riot student based buy actual observing physics question bar dialogue medium open clarifying

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

When Buy-in is Not Enough: GTAs’ RIOT Profile in Mini-Studios

Matthew Wilcox, Yuehai Yang, and Jacquelyn ChiniUniversity of Central Florida

This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grant DUE1246024. Slide2

Mini-studios

Weekly 3 hour class in addition to introductory physics lecture.Approximately 32 students in 8 groups of 4 students.

15 minutes:

Quiz

75 minutes:

Student-centered recitation

Maryland’s Open Source Tutorials1

75 minutes:Inquiry-based LabsInvestigative Science Learning Environment (ISLE)2

A.

Elby

, “Open-source tutorials integrated with professional development materials”, http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~elby/CCLI/index.html

E.

Etkina

and A. Van

Heuvelen

, Phys. Ed. Res. Conf., (2001).Slide3

Real-time Instructor Observing Tool (RIOT)

For this research, focused only on the actions taken.

Instructors are

always

doing only

one

action.Report the percentage of time spent on each action.

Time

West, Emily A., et al. "Variation of instructor-student interactions in an introductory interactive physics course." 

Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research

 9.1 (2013): 010109.

www.sjsuriot.appspot.comSlide4

Introducing Taresa

Graduate student, first year at UCF.

Taking TA pedagogy seminar.

Teaching algebra-based E&M mini-studio.

RIOT profile averaged over three classes throughout the semester.Slide5

RIOT-based Survey

TAs were asked to estimate a RIOT profile based on several perspectivesA TA who teaches based exactly on the design of the class

What they (the survey taker) feel is the most helpful way to teach

How they feel their students would like them to teach

Compare responses between two perspectives or between a perspective and their actual profile.

Number of disagreements,

δ, measures the similarity of the profiles.δ can range from 0 to 10.Clarifying

ExplainingStudent Question…Relatively High

Relatively Low

Medium …Slide6

Clarifying

Explaining

Student Question

Closed Dialogue

Open Dialogue

Passive Observing

Active Observing

Student PresentationStudents Talking SeriallyNot InteractingMediumRelatively LowMediumRelatively LowRelatively HighRelatively HighMedium

Medium

Medium

Relatively Low

Clarifying

Explaining

Student Question

Closed Dialogue

Open Dialogue

Passive Observing

Active Observing

Student

Presentation

Students Talking Serially

Not Interacting

Medium

Relatively Low

MediumMedium

Relatively HighMediumMediumMediumMedium

Relatively Low

TA profile based on design of class:

TA profile you think is most helpful:

Number of disagreements,

δ

= 2 out of 10.Slide7

High level of buy-in. GREAT! But…

Does it translate to practice?

This is the smallest

δ

when comparing with her actual profile

Taresa’s

actual profile compared to…δ, out of 10

Her understanding of the design

Her idea of the best way to teach

Her idea of what the students want from her

8

8

5Slide8

Interview Evidence for Buy-in

In response to a question about how her view of the role of a TA has changed,“I try not to interject my own ideas and thoughts to their groups. I try to

listen more and try to be quiet more

to let them

arrive at solutions themselves

because as we’ve learned in the pedagogy seminar the

peer instruction is more beneficial to the student…”In response to how she feels her RIOT profile may have changed,“I tried to explain things less which should give them the benefit of having more discussion.”Slide9

Interview Evidence for Student Influence

In response to a question about using whiteboards,“I had a chance but I didn’t really end up using them as much as I probably should have. It was difficult, so when I would implement it

the students wouldn’t want to use it

they would end up putting it on the floor

and it was kind of hard to…monitor

that I guess. And give them motivation to actually use it.”

After seeing her actual RIOT profile,“From this it’s obvious there’s just more explaining than I feel would be good.”Slide10

In summary…

Expressing difficulty stepping back and letting students talk,“It’s very difficult sometimes when they get frustrated with you for not giving them the answer but I think the seminar helped me see the value in that.”Slide11

Wrapping up

Taresa‘s practices are not reflecting her buy-in but are most similar to what she thinks the students want from her.Created a survey based on RIOT to quantify TA buy-in and influences on their practice.Slide12

For more information see:

“Quicker Method for Assessing Influences on Teaching Assistant Buy-in and Practices in Reformed Courses” Physical Review Physics Education ResearchThank you!Questions?Slide13

Converting the Actual Profile to Rankings

Blue bar is one standard deviation of the action percentages in height and centered on the average (10%).

Actions that fall below the bar are ranked as “Relatively Low”, above the bar as “Relatively High” and in the bar as “Medium”