In this case study we return to the Botany students and their encounter with the use of the scientific method of enquiry into the phenomenon of apical dominance in plants. The results, you will remember, were not all that we hoped for in this think-band-do-for-yourself type of experiment. The encounter in most groups scored too low on effectiveness (-/+) and efficiency (-/+). What was the problem? What was the solution? Continue reading 4.4 Case study no. 5: Riding out the storm
Author: Jan Nedermeijer
4.5 Some tips Chapter 4
3.1 Introduction
‘What is the difference between the mental gymnastics of thinking up a design and the mental gymnastics of working out a design?’ Continue reading 3.1 Introduction
3.2 What does setting up the S-R events involve?
An S-R event is an educational happening. It has a beginning, a middle and an end. It occupies a relatively short or relatively long time-slot in the course or lesson to which it belongs. It has its own identity. If necessary you can, for example, temporarily take it out of the course or lesson, clean up any elements in it that are giving trouble, and put it back again. An exercise in problem-solving, a laboratory demonstration, a class discussion of a controversial topic, a lecture, and an educational visit to a jam factory, are all examples of an Sat event. Continue reading 3.2 What does setting up the S-R events involve?
3.3 What choice is there for sequencing the S-R events?
‘Chain’, ‘necklace’, ‘spiral’, ‘network’, ‘hybrid’ — these are the titles we use in the Think Tank workshop for the different methods of sequencing S-R events that a thought-up design can demand. A thought-up design has a ‘route map’ in it; it will tell you the order in which it wants the worked-out design to let the learner meet the content (substance) of the course or lesson. Continue reading 3.3 What choice is there for sequencing the S-R events?
3.4 What does ‘controlling the quality of an S-R event’ involve?
This activity in the working out of a design is something which is going on intuitively and automatically when you have had some experience in working out designs. This is because, as you come to work out a thought-up design, the criteria for a good design which helped you think it up have taken on an imperative ring. Continue reading 3.4 What does ‘controlling the quality of an S-R event’ involve?
3.5 Case study no. 3: Pictures in your mind
From our own experience in learning situations we know how special and important it can be to imagine something. Why then don’t we (as designers and teachers) give more attention to the use of the student’s imagination in a teaching-learning situation? Imagination can be a very powerful tool for learning. Below is a description of an S-R event in which didactic use is being deliberately made of a doctor’s imagination. Continue reading 3.5 Case study no. 3: Pictures in your mind
3.6 Case study no. 4: Giving students the chance to think for themselves
As a designer of courses and lessons you will always be in demand if you have success in creating response environments for learning in which students are given the responsibility and the chance to think for themselves. Continue reading 3.6 Case study no. 4: Giving students the chance to think for themselves
3.7 Some tips Chapter 3
2.1 Introduction
A glass jar stands on my desk. It is labelled ‘Think Tank’ and contains a piece of white cotton wool. From time to time it makes an excursion with me to a three-thy workshop for teachers on the subject of design decision-making at activity 4 of the course and lesson design process described in this book (see Fig. 1). This is the step at which the designer looks back at the needs specified during activity 3, and looks ahead to what should be happening when the course or lesson is installed (activity 5) and in action. It is a three-day workshop on the subject of the ‘design of learning experiences’. Continue reading 2.1 Introduction