[Swee Liang TanParticipant]

Hi Marti

You are most welcome! I will try to share my thoughts the best I can, in response to your queries

Q1: I am interested in your view on how Grasha and Reichmann’s taxonomy cross-references with the three presences, and, in particular, with the facilitation, direct instruction and design (D, DI, D) of teaching presence?

I feel that each of five modes (expert/ formal authority / personal mode / facilitator / delegator) lend itself to the teaching presence (F, DI and D). In the case of direct instruction, the instructor takes on stronger role of being an expert / formal authority (as instructors, at least the way I see myself, we operate across these modes (and GR has identified 4 clusters) …. As a facilitator, the teaching presence of facilitation comes into play

Q2: And how might Grasha and Reichmann inform what the students do for their own teaching of themselves, support metacognition and for peer-teaching? 

One of the role of being a delegator is to encourage students to be self-directed learners (self-motivated /self-monitor/self-measure and self-manage), and where part of the delegation involves group work, students are encouraged to peer-teach.

(Note: I do get cautious when using surveys that profilesa style – be it teaching / learning. So really i use these surveys to frame the things I need to implement on the ground, putting aside for the moment, essential questions regarding validity, reliability, how grounded in research these tools are, ect)

Yes, of course! Please feel free to share my post with your students.

I have set up a website on google and I am happy to send you an invite to the site, if you like to drop in to see how I design the site to build a teaching, social and cognitive presence. I am working with Norm to strengthen each of these presences. I felt it was weak on social presence, and I have attempted to plug that gap.

A few questions that been festering in me ever since I “stumbled into this field”

Should there be more presences to teaching, social and cognitive (Aside from emotional aspect)?
And while many instructors now have common language / understanding of these presences, are our students taking our course aware of these, and why we want to in-built these? Should they be aware of their role? To my knowledge, the focus is still on role of the instructor in each of these presences when designing/developing/delivering a BL environment, and what they should do when issues arise. What about the role of the students a BL environment?
Should the instructor alone (in teaching a course), or should the community be more involved in a university-wide redesign (academic and non-academic staff) to bring out these presences in a BL environment? Obviously the latter is preferred – how does one do it?

I would  love to hear your thoughts on these.

Kind regards
Swee Liang

[Swee Liang TanParticipant]

Hi Norm

Thanks for your questions. This is Swee Liang here, from Singapore Management University. Here are some reflections as I prepare for  a BL in a ECON103A International Economics course. As I respond to your questions, I am learning something new, which I share as well at the end.

For (1): I will be using the First day of class (F2F), and other days where there are F2F teaching to model the type of communication (dialogue and critical discourse) I want to see taking place inside and outside of the classroom. Teaching through case study is one method to demonstrate an open communication and trust

For trust, that students can trust me – there needs to be evidenced of faculty competency in the subject matter , and of faculty being able to empathize to struggles that students face when learning challenging materials. I like the work of Mihaly on “Finding flow”.

For trust, that student trust each other – social presence kicks in here. To explain to students that the community is here to learn from each other, without judgement ..?  (it can be easy to say that we want this, but i think that can be challenging to convince students if there are occasions of summative peer review of each other’s work)

For (2): To facilitate higher order thinking questions that one ask to promote reflections and discourse (see Brookfield, Discussion as a Way of Teaching). To have workshops to prepare students on how to ask critical questions, listen actively and respond thoughtfully. At SMU, our Centre for Teaching Excellence, which I an the director, runs workshop for incoming students on how to become effective learners @ SMU. A good ICT tool that enables the discourse is essential. I am using google discussion forum, but i find the aesthetic, layout and structure not user-friendly, especially when the discussion threads becomes unwieldy. If you have  suggestions for alternative platform , I would appreciate it

For (3): On community and cohesion: What I do is that for my class, I prepare students on effective ways to do team work by showing them the structure or guides (see HERDSA Guide on Managing Student Team, 2006).  I have project work, for students to practice these skills. Our Centre for Teaching Excellence also runs workshop for incoming students on how to become effective learners @ SMU, and team work is one of the segment. I guess similar to the other 6 items, it is about communicating to students to bring in such skills from their out of class learning (community involvement project, leadership and teambuilding experience) into the classroom course environment. Seamless / connected learning (?)

For (4 – 5- 6, and the others as well, because i see overlaps in some of these principles): I believe in getting faculty to  ”model  these behavior” through discussion – teaching using cases is one method for faculty to model this behavior. I have used Grasha and Reichmann Teaching Style Survey and found the 5 roles of faculty useful as a reference on the various roles faculty can play over the duration of the course (expert/ formal authority / personal mode / facilitator / delegator)

Now that I have articulated this, I am beginning to see the strength of blended learning environment can be raised through integrating seamlessly with learning that comes from non-academic modules. And choosing suitable methods of teaching (eg teaching using cases) can  facilitate one to achieve the principles above …

On (7): having the alignment of assessment to learning outcome is important, as is alignment with instructional strategies. If we are looking at creating a BL environment together with holistic development of students, the authenticity and relevance of assessment to real world issues, are just as important as alignment/congruency

The above are raw ideas and I welcome feedback from the you and the community

Kind regards

Swee Liang

 

 

[Author]

Posts