Planning Teaching and Guiding 8.9.2021
- Afnan Khan
- Sep 8, 2021
- 6 min read
Updated: Sep 27, 2021
Once the formal studies had started, the first course taken as a class was Pedagogical Competence I. This course comprised four online interactive steps spread across four days. The four steps were: planning; implementation; reflection; and assessment. This blog covers the planning day's webinar experience, learning various theories about planning, on both a metacognitive and a social level.
Four teams were assigned different tasks. Each team had to answer their own designated question in the form of a presentation and lecture given to the other groups. There was a fifth team that was assigned the specific task of evaluating the other groups. They had to note down the key learnings based on a given set of guidelines. The jigsaw method of learning was adopted, whereby participants learned together in their own group and also from other groups.
Our team, the Amazing Group, were assigned the following task:
"What is a pedagogical script? How can it help you promote learning in a classroom, in on-the-job learning situations and in virtual settings?"
After two days, we decided to meet as a team in the last testing session, and everyone was required to read related material, especially the reference material assigned by the instructors. We met at an agreed time in a team live meeting. We shared our thoughts about pedagogical scripts in general, and about what we had read regarding various theories and methods provided in reference documents. The first 30 minutes proved to be challenging, because everyone had his or her own understanding of what a pedagogical script entailed.
After some brainstorming, we decided to gather everyone’s ideas together into an online PowerPoint document. Within just a few minutes, things were already shaping up nicely and starting to look much more organised.
- Our PPT's title slide - 👇
Then, we divided the lecture into different sections, assigning different sections to different team members; this way, each team member would be able to spend more time focusing on their specific section, and detail could be added later. We then did some brainstorming about making the process more interactive and 'learning by doing'. We decided to make a Padlet, and compiled a list of questions to put on it. Once the general structure was ready, we decided to work alone later on individual tasks/slides. In the following two days, everyone studied more material and added additional videos, exercises and graphics to their assigned tasks/slides. By Sunday evening, the presentation was in excellent shape and ready to go. The following day, one group member took the responsibility of emailing the finished presentation to the instructors in pdf format.
The day before the actual presentation, we received the following comments from the instructor:
"The plan seems clear to me. The idea of the pedagogical script comes through. I'd love to see participants create a simple pedagogical script if there is time..." Janne.
After reading the comments, I feel encouraged that we are at least heading in the right direction.
Presentation Day
The presentation day began with a 30-minute warm-up session led by the instructors, in which they described previous events and answered any questions. After this, everyone went to their assigned rooms, and lectures started straight away. Due to some confusion, I went to the wrong room and attended the first lecture there, but later I was informed that people were waiting for me in the other room. I quickly switched rooms and joined them in the second ongoing lecture. The lectures I attended addressed the following three questions:
Group Tasks
Group 1 Question: How do the official documents and regulations affect the teaching planning in your vocational field? Where can you find all this information?
Group 2 Question: What are the different views of learning, and how do they affect the teaching planning in your particular vocational field and competency-based education? Choose at least one view that you used in your teaching task!
Group 3 Question: How do a student-centred approach, personalisation and a competence-based system affect the planning?
On the whole, all three group representatives delivered lectures with excellent professional know-how. Having spent a long time in the field of technology, to be immersed in the field of education sciences and discover the learning process was a new and exciting experience for me.
I delivered the final presentation in the group. Things generally went smoothly in my presentation and in the presentations of the group overall; an instructor also visited a few times and wrote these comments in the chat:
"In this group, you have clear and interactive presentations and nice, calm teaching styles" – Riikka.
Due to the shortage of time, I did not spend so much time lecturing; instead, I opted to use Padlet and interactive graphics and videos. I focused mainly on interactive discussion and keeping the audience engaged. At different points, we all discussed our thought processes about the pedagogical script and the planning of it.
The other lectures also offered a variety of information and learning points.
Abdollah's lecture was the first one I attended. Initially, there were a few technical problems which were quickly resolved. The lesson took the form of an interactive lecture. He used the Kahoot gaming system to present multiple-choice questions related to the topics. Ha gained the highest score, and I think I took third place, because I was a little slow in answering, and there was a time limit. On the whole, however, there were new things learned and useful information to take on board. After this, Abdullah made use of a Padlet to collect our opinions, helping to make the planning process run smoothly whilst following guidelines and regulations. The national reforms in the vocational education system and the various insights about crucial developments were informative parts of the presentation.
Virginia's lecture was about learning views and teaching plans. It was another well-designed lecture, with good time management. The way she described their work and thought processes while preparing this lecture was a good starting point. Their group described the teaching approaches and explained the two main approaches based on the materials provided in this course. She mentioned learning-based and content-based approaches, explaining them clearly via an interactive discussion. She referenced the primary reading material "Handbook for teachers", by Hyppönen and Linden. She also assessed the different methods in terms of various levels of difficulty, such as easy, accessible, average, and demanding. Each of them was further divided into subcategories taken from “Handbook for teachers”.
The third presentation was from Ivan and Group three. It was, for me at least, one of the most interactive and well-planned presentations of the day. Firstly, he described the levels of educational, course and class planning in terms of a planning pyramid. He briefly described each type of planning before moving on to lesson planning, which he described in detail, defining the following six sub-steps:
Outlining the learning objective
Developing the introduction
Planning the body of the lesson
Planning checking for understanding
Developing a conclusion
Creating a realistic timeline
The exercise part was also very well designed, and each person had to fill out the planning form before and after assigning a learning method. In the first draft, we planned at a general level. In the next one, the planning was based on the designated learning method. It was a good way of reflecting on our work, and we have noticed a change in our planning methods.
All presentations and discussion sessions helped to develop a deeper understanding of reference material, metacognitive learning and social learning as a whole. All aspects of planning were covered by the groups, but it is undoubtedly a vast and specialised field, with many new lessons to be learned.
References:
Dreyfus, S.E., 2004. The five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bulletin of science, technology & society, 24(3), pp.177-181.
College, M., 2021. Blooms Higher Level Verbs | Curriculum | Mesa Community College. [online] Mesacc.edu. Available at: <https://www.mesacc.edu/employees/course-management/curriculum/resources/blooms-higher-level-verbs> [Accessed 13 September 2021].
Oamk.fi. 2021. Professional Teacher Education :: Oulun ammattikorkeakoulu :: Opinto-opas. [online] Available at: <https://www.oamk.fi/opinto-opas/en/school-professional-teacher-education/professional-teacher-education> [Accessed 13 September 2021].
Aaltodoc.aalto.fi. 2021. [online] Available at: <https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/4755/isbn9789526030357.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y> [Accessed 13 September 2021].
About Author
Afnan is an RDI Specialist at the LAB University of Applied Sciences. His research areas include product and service development, innovations, knowledge creation, brain drain in Finland. He is also a work-life coach and multicultural trainer in Arffman (Barona Oy), Finland. Additionally, he has worked in five different countries and completed multiple university degrees in Finland and abroad. He has also worked as a researcher in Finland and Sweden. His blog series named Rooting for Pedagogy Science is his personal journey to learn pedagogy in Finnish perceptive.
Connect with Afnan on LinkedIn
Comments