Bas Koene (course coordinator) Dept 2 - Organization and HRM

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dealing with diversity: Rethinking the Lecture – Seminar Format in Language and Content Provision Joanne Hooker and John Holder.
Advertisements

Peer Tutoring 1 Peer tutoring as a means of enhancing nursing students’ professional development K. H. Yuen & A. Tiwari The University of Hong.
1 Small Group Teaching Linda Carey Centre for Educational Development Queen’s University Belfast.
ITGS Extended Essay An introduction to IB Year 1 Students by Panagiotis Kafkarkou.
Student Learning Objectives The SLO Process Student Learning Objectives Training Series Module 3 of 3.
District-level SBA Seminar 2007 HKCEE English Language SBA Implementation in School Experience Sharing 13 March 2006.
IMPRESS Aiding transition into HE through highly specified on-entry skills support David Bowers, Head of Learning Development University Campus Suffolk.
Becoming legitimate: promoting the use of reciprocal peer learning for early career academics Stuart McGugan & Christos Petichakis Centre for Lifelong.
Group work – why do it? Rachel Horn – Civil & Structural Engineering.
Professionally Speaking : Qualitative Research and the Professions. Using action research to gauge the quality of feedback given to student teachers while.
Project-Based Learning (PBL) Vivene Robinson.
1 Welcome to the Team : Tutor and Demonstrator Development Program Faculties of Science.
Becoming an Outstanding Primary School Teacher School Direct.
Applying Laurillard’s Conversational Framework to Blended Learning Blogging and Collaborative Activity Design R Papworth, R Walker & W Britcliffe E-Learning.
Earth Educators’ Rendezvous Workshop Leader Webinar Introduction Workshop Design Best Practices Utilizing the Web Tools Evaluation Instruments David McConnell,
Course goals During the course the students will develop their product development expertise by gaining knowledge on product life cycle impacts, on material.
Higher Drama Unit Assessment and Course Assessment.
The Blended Learning Project. Session Objective  Introduce the Blended Learning Project  Explore and experience SOLA packs that have already been created.
SAM (Self-Assessment of MTSS Implementation) ADMINISTRATION TRAINING
Good teaching for diverse learners
Linda Wareck and Kerry Daniel, Instructional Technologists
The Performance and Staff Development Program
David Pierce, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
Situated supervision Ability to read the situation ….
02086 Writing Inspirations Aalto University
Polices, procedures & protocols
NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT and PROCESS
Higher Drama Unit Assessment and Course Assessment
The Vertically-Integrated Projects (VIP) Program: Integrating Undergraduate Education and Graduate Research Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational.
M-LANG project  Ref. n NO01-KA Interactive Exchange Workshop on how to use response systems and ICT tools for creating interactive learning.
02086 Writing Inspirations Aalto University
Chapter 2 Introduction to Computer User Support
EFFECTIVE LESSON PLANNING Teacher Academy
Inquiry Based Learning In Action
Teaching Evaluations at TTU Using the IDEA Instrument
Assessment in cliL Petra Vallin.
Writing Tasks and Prompts
02086 Writing Inspirations Aalto University
Promoting Learning and Understanding for Students in Mathematics
Programme Review: Staff Orientation Directorate of Quality Promotion
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
Introduction to Internal Audits
LMS Launch Plan Helping organizations get their online training program off the ground seamlessly.
Teaching Tools and Learning Platforms for PhD Teaching
Welcome to Room 11 Kerry Sanchez
PROJECT BASED LEARNING
Literacy Content Specialist, CDE
6th grade English Language Arts Curriculum Night
Connecticut Core Standards for Mathematics
British Institute of Learning Disabilities
An Introduction to e-Assessment
Portfolio Information PPT
Building a relationship with your supervisor
A person who conduct a study, identifies activities and objectives and determines a procedure to achieve the objectives.
The Hub Innovation Program Evaluation Plan
Topic 5: Preparing for the world of work
Creative assessment and feedback
Welcome to Your New Position As An Instructor
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
Guidelines for Reports Advanced Constraint Processing
Pedagogical Practice, Shift, and Professional Growth in Online Courses
Seven Principles of Good Teaching
AP World History Introduction.
Jaeliza Morales CUR/516 Dr. Mary Poe
OBSERVATION AND FEEDBACK
The Who, What, When and Where of Coaching
Portfolio Information PPT
Developing SMART Professional Development Plans
Portfolio Information PPT
Mastering Discussion (aka Managing Classroom discussion)
Presentation transcript:

Bas Koene (course coordinator) Dept 2 - Organization and HRM Peer reviewing of case study assignments by 2nd year Ba students Course: Organization Theory and Dynamics Bas Koene (course coordinator) Dept 2 - Organization and HRM

Introduction Organization theory Theory not difficult But application: Apply carefully and precisely Deal with real-life ambiguity in assessment and analysis Relevance clear from practical application Course OTD: 900 students, mandatory introductory course Lectures: overview organization theory Learning Communities: support case research and writing 2 lecturers, 6 LC coaches, 2 stud assistants

Learning communities 1200 students 24 learning communities 50 students per community 10 teams of 5 students 7 LC meetings: interaction between teams Poster presentations, short plenary presentations, role plays Feedback on own work, ideas from what other teams do, practice skills (presentation, feedback, dialogue) Peer review process

Peer review process Final case study assignment  build up in three parts General description of organization Investigation culture, photo ethnography Interviewing about change objectives and methods Peer reviews: Active engagement with work other teams (see different solutions) Creativity and benchmarking own progress Engage with theory and reports in different way

Peer review system: Expertiza Automated (dealing with 900 plus students) Ability to give qualitative feedback, comments for improvement (not just scoring) Meta-feedback possible Get feedback on your review Peer control, signaling function for teacher Aggregate scores (feedback and meta-feedback available for teacher)

Expertiza Pilot: who involved? Surf-net: comparison peer reviews systems RISBO / American developers Comparison systems (surf-net), selection of system Setting it up for use / adaptation for us User manuals students / teaching staff & stud assistants Support in first use / specialist ‘helpdesk’ BIT: technical implementation Department Academic staff: review questions Student assistant(s!): maintain system, first line helpdesk, etc Secretariat: back up…

Implementation program Jan 08 – surf-net seminar peer reviewing, some non-teaching examples Feb 08 – talks with RISBO about possibilities May 08 – tentative choice for Expertiza, RISBO contact with US June 08 – test version at RSM, adaptations made for us July 08 – testing of system Aug 08 – preparation of system for use Sep 08 – first use of system

Ambitions/expectations – experience (1) Structured peer review in depth feedback Steer by structuring process, not outcomes Feedback helpful for improving assignments Three reviews will safeguard some good feedback Possibilities for grading? Initial experiences: Need to learn to work with giving feedback Know how to work with theory in analysis Value of being critical in a constructive way Structured feedback list works But need for staff feedback (as example / to set standard) early on or need less ambitious feedback lists? Students asked for peer reviews in second round First round sep: 1 in 3 reviews really useful, but: good reviews take time! Quality numerical extremely (!) varied. Some expertiza issues: Feedback screens could be clearer Not used overview facilities to check to progress and quality of peer reviews

Ambitions/expectations – experience (2) Use independently of Learning communities First presentations in LCs Afterwards peer reviewing with additional insight, better reviews? Anonymity needed? Students too nice to each other? Students not serious, just going through the motions Deadlines necessary? Use Expertiza to monitor peer review process Teaching staff final evaluations also through system Initial perceptions: Need for face-to-face contact after review Peer control, leverage reviews in dialogue (Not anonymous!!) Work with paper and review comments immediately after receiving them Good students extremely clear about bad (light) feedback Yes, how set right ambition level for papers without direct teacher feedback? Not reading assignments / tasks disrupts online interaction! (interdependence teams) Yes! Clear deadlines are necessary Pilot: fine-tuning system more work, monitoring face-to-face in my own LCs Expertiza interface not efficient if teacher wants to monitor quality of feedback Make questions that lead to comprehensive feedback ‘stories’ Organize feedback interface differently (by question not by respondent Need to do all grading off-line first, need overview scores in grading process

What do you need to make it work? Our constraints: Expertiza Pilot: first year Large course: (1200+ students) Need dedicated help-desk for questions and for dealing with technical issues and deadlines (Have enough manpower available. At least two student assistants!) Extremely busy around deadlines (do not set them at 17.00!) Need way to deal with exceptions (what if teams are late uploading their paper / reviewing)? FAQ system would be useful. Course email addresses + BB email facility worked, discussion board becomes to messy Guard simplicity of tasks and requirements. Way to remind them… Pilot: The proof of the pudding… Hotline with professional support very useful! (in our case BIT and RISBO) How handle unexpected: Students appreciate information and feedback in case of unexpected events