1st session. Planning - Pedagogical Scripts
I had to present on my own a work that included six different points of views coming from each member of our team. In consequence, the first challenge was to understand everyone's thoughts and try to transmit those to the rest of the audience. Fortunately, we held several meetings, apart from continuous contacts through messaging applications, where we had the opportunity to discuss all these aspects.
This was our topic as the PINK team:
– What is a pedagogical script? How can that help you promote learning in a classroom, on the job learning and virtual settings?
As an attempt to use an attractive layout, we compared the structure of our presentation with a supposed flight including: flight plan (learning objectives), take-off (definitions), cruise (examples) , middle deacons (different scenarios) and happy landings (conclusions). We presented the definition of pedagogical scripts as "activity programs that aim to facilitate collaborative learning by specifying activities in collaborative settings, eventually sequencing these activities and assigning the activities to individual learners" (Weinberger et al., 2005).
These scripts or patterns meant to facilitate learning objectives have multiple applications depending on the environment:
– What are the views of learning and how do they affect the planning of the teaching in your particular vocational field and in competence-based education? Choose at least one view that you use in your teaching task.
The ORANGE team had the mission to explain different learning perspectives and their influence on planning. There are many learning theories but they managed to filter some of the most common ones:
- Behaviourism. Teacher-centered approach transmitting the information.
- Humanism. Through the learner's experiences.
- Socio-cognitive. Active construction.
- Social-constructivist. Social learning.
– How do the official documents and regulations affect the planning of the teaching? Where can you find the information? (BLUE team):
- INTERNAL DOCUMENTS. Regulations, circulars or notices.
- EXTERNAL DOCUMENTS. Based on common directives by the European Union these documents can come from a national or a regional institution (I.e. Vocational Education Decree 673/2007)
- WHERE TO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS:
- Ministry of Education and Culture (minedu.fi)
- Finnish National Agency for Education (oph.fi)
- Finnish Education Evaluation Center (karvi.fi)
- Finlex
The GREEN team showed us through a Kahoot learning game the meaning of a student-centred approach. They also explained about the concept of planning, the way competence is demonstrated and the meaning of personalisation in teaching.
With this lecture we learned the difference between the traditional teacher-centred approach versus the student-centred. Apart from the numerous benefits of the latter it was presented how the learner is the ultimate responsible of the learning process and how the concept of competence must be understood for a correct demonstration. The flexibility of this student-centred approach became patently clear when we realised the immense possibilities of personalisation that may be involved.
During this first session, all the groups used very interactive tools when presenting their findings with a special prevalence for Kahoot and Padlet as preferred utilities. These platforms helped to understand dense content – as learning theories and their implications during planning – in a more amusing way. Through these presentations I personally had the general outlook of what kind of documents affect planning, what theories/perspectives give form to this planning and the benefits of moving to a student-centred approach in contrast to traditional teaching methods.
Coming back to our presentation, the common positive feedback coming from the rest of our classmates had to do with the format of presentation (the metaphor of a flight) and the useful final discussion on pedagogical scripts as a way to understand the concept as a dynamic pattern applied to a course/lesson.
Not bad as a first attempt but – as a personal exercise of self critic – still a far way ahead in terms of speech fluency and connection with the audience.
Here is in short my personal assessment to the whole session:
✅
- General good feelings.
- Good team coordination and commitment.
- Amusing presentations with good timings.
❌
- Technical difficulties when trying to use several programs simultaneously.
- Not being sure if the message got 100% to destination.
- Improvable time efficiency during our group meetings when organising tasks.
What is your personal opinion? Leave your comment down here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
⬇️ ⬇️ ⬇️ ⬇️ ⬇️
Sources:
Hämäläinen, R. (2008). Designing and Investigating PEDAGOGICAL SCRIPTS to Facilitate Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. University of Jyväskylä. Finnish Institute for Educational Research.
Nokelainen, P. (2017). Pedagogical scripting in CSCL. Laboratory of Industrial and Information Management. Tampere University of Technology.
Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., Jaspers, J. G. M., & Janssen, J. (2010). Guiding students’ online complex learning-task behavior through representational scripting. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 927 - 939
Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.
Jalal, G., Lachand, V., Tabard, A., Michel, C. (2018). Design, Adjust and Reuse – How Teachers Script Pedagogical Activities.
Brattenberg, S. o. B. E. (2010). Inføring i kroppsøvningsdidaktik. Oslo
Essi Vuopala & Venla Vallivaara / University of Oulu, Learning and Educational Technology Research Unit (2013).
Comments
Post a Comment