Learning & Teaching

The following questions were an attempt to gather evaluation data from the group of students that participated in the lecture. I based the questions on Kirkpatrick’s first level of his four levels of evaluation. This opening stage concentrates on Reactions and sets out to gauge student’s initial reactions to both the class content and overall learning experience. This ultimately will be used by myself to improve the lecture when or if it’s repeated in the future. At the bottom of each response I have attempted to draw on these responses and summarise where improvements can be made.

1. What is your name? (Leave blank if you wish to be anonymous)

• Catherine:    (25.00 %)

• Jonny:    (25.00 %)

• Martin:    (25.00 %)

• Emily:     (25.00 %)

Comment:

Anonymity may be provided to ensure that reserved students are able to discuss issues in a public forum without identification (Lowder & Hagan, 1999). However, I was mindful of the argument that the main disadvantage of anonymity in discussion forums is that it “has the potential to encourage negative or irresponsible use” (Nanlohy and Munns, 2000). Although this wasn’t a forum where opinions could be openly expressed and lead to irresponsible responses, the potential was still there, no matter how unlikely. I ensured that the posed questions were directed and clear.

2. Did you enjoy the class?

• Yes:    (100.00%)

• No:

Comment:

I would assume that this question is one of the main drivers of a successful learning experience and whatever was answered here would reflect in all of the remaining questions . If the response had been partly of completely negative then I would have to consider fundamental changes to my approach, content and design. It does however raise an interesting hypothetical question i.e. Does a learning experience have to be enjoyable for the students to learn? There has been research carried out that has found evidence that dopamine release can enhance attentiveness and learning, thus suggesting that a positive mind enables a richer learning experience. (Cagniard et al, 2006)

3. In what way (if any) did you find the class relevant?

• I want to do stage management so I gained insightful information. I also thought it was very useful for practicing actual blocking in real time. It gave you a real sense of the pressure the DSM would have during rehearsals, showing the real need for blocking notation.

• It gave me more practice in blocking.

• I felt I learnt many things on another level. While the content was aimed at a low level, it made me think about small things I could do as an ASM, or in any role, to make my life and other peoples lives easier. This would include using post-its, and numbering blocking so number can be moved easier, something I have never done before. It also made ways of communicating effectively through technology.

• It’s relevant to many aspects of stage production, such as lighting design- as you mentioned

Comment:

I found the third response the most revealing here, I had been worried that I had set the level of the class too low. It hadn’t occurred to me that this may have been beneficial in it’s own way. The students were allowed to revise within the session itself and it would seem that a few found this valuable. Added value was created by this approach in that the students were afforded the ’space’ to experiment with new found techniques. As a result of this particular feedback I now know where this session would be best placed within the curriculum i.e. as a revision session for Deputy Stage Managers just prior to them taking on the role as an elective choice.

4. Was the venue, style and timing of the class appropriate?

• venue was very clean and tidy, bright and welcoming, good relaxed atmosphere, mix of styles was effective, i blogged about it for you

• I think the venue was appropriate, and timing was suitable considering that an examiner was needed to be present and it should be out with our normal working hours. (Normally I would hope a class would be timetabled to take place during the day!) The style was good, but there was quite a lot of moving between areas, which I know John was aware of. Class size meant we could have the attention we need, but made me feel quite under pressure since there were not many other people to bounce ideas off or support me with any questions I had. Again I realize this was under exceptional circumstances.

• The venue was good, it had plenty of room. I like the use of all the technology, it was a much more interesting way to learn. Timing was a bit off but only because I finished early if i had finished when I was suppose it would have been perfect time for my to grab tea then come. Longer lesson would have been more appropriate for the time I waited for the class.

• Yes

Comment:

The venue was chosen specifically for two reasons; the amount of space it provided to move around and create two teaching area’s, the second reason was my familiarity with the venue (it is a regular venue for my classes). Placing the lecture within an actual theatrical venue also helped to further contextualise the event for the students and by making available the professional tools required to carry out the tasks. “we see at work the role played by material resources (such as works of art or video recording equipment) and by human resources (such as supportive teachers or critical peers) in bringing a complex project through to completion.” (Gardner on contextualising intelligence, 2006)

5. How engaged did you feel in the class?

• Completely:    (75.00 %)

• Mostly:    (25.00 %)

• Sometimes:

• Hardly ever:

• Never:

Comment:

Again, this simple multiple choice question was intended to gauge a general ‘feeling’ of engagement. The  cause for concern here is that 25% (1 student) of the class weren’t fully engaged with the lecture, the way I evaluate this statistic (in my mind) is that if I was teaching 100 students, 25 of them would be disengaged. With this in mind, I have shortfalls to address. With the percentage drop noted at this point I hope to identify solutions from the remaining responses. Another possible factor was that 25% of the group weren’t as engaged as the oher because of the lack of assessment. With no assessment there was no clearly defined Academic goal, add to this that the students were aware that the class was a simulation, then a rationale of these percentages can be reached quite easily.

6. How well do you think you understood the subject?

• I thoroughly understand:    (100.00 %)

• I understand most aspects:

• I know enough to get by:

• I struggled with the concepts:

• I dont have a clue:

Comment:

With all members of the class having a  thorough understanding of the lecture can lead me to several possible assumptions:

1. The lecture was perfect.
2. The lecture was too easy.
3. The initial question was too general with not enough levels of ‘understanding’ for the students to match themselves against.

7. Did you find yourself distanced at any point in the class? If so, when?

• Not really, apart from having this lesson a few weeks ago. It was also annoying to have to keep moving from the TV over to the blocking area.

• i didnt, sorry i couldnt be more constructive with that statement

• Not that I can think of. I will be writing my blog soon, and might have some ideas there.

• No

Comment:

This issue of moving from one area to another was again raised  here, if the lecture had been longer then this wouldn’t have become so apparent, more time would be spent in a single area. Using a TV on a stand also contributed to the issue, where it was a higher resolution picture it did make moving it more awkward. In my regular classes I use a data projector and screen and have more time (a break) to set up the next portion of the class. If I were to use this session again then it would be no shorter than 60 minutes in length. The mix of live simulation and onscreen simulation (the animations) was well balanced, (2 live sessions and 2 online experiences) which aided in keeping the students engaged with the lesson’s content. The timing of ’switching over’ between both could perhaps be re-visited as what I delivered was not what I had planned.

8. Did you find the class challenging?

• Too easy, I wasn’t challenged.:

• It was easy but enjoyable.:     (100.00 %)

• I got lost a few times.:

• I had to try really hard.:

• Impossible, gave up.:

Comment:

Another supporting factor to further the claim that the session was below the level required by this particular cohort. They all found it easy (though enjoyable). However, in defense of the classes aim, it was never intended to be entirely focused on blocking and it’s notation. There was a learning remit to cover the concept of VARK learning styles as well as specific subject matter. The aim was to take a journey through VARK using blocking notation as the vehicle in which to do so.

9. How likely are you to use what you learned today in a real situation?

• Very likely:     (50.00 %)

• Likely:    (50.00 %)

• Occasionally:

• Rarely:

• Never:

Comment:

This may have been a more alarming statistic if the class had purely been made up of subject specialists, however this cohort were made up of potential Stage Managers, (I was aware that 2 out of the four may not elect to pursue this specialism any further after 1st Year) Technical Stage Managers (TSM) and Production Electricians (PLX) students. Only the Stage Managers would be definite (Very Likely) with the choices presented above.

10. Choose the learning style that best suits you from the dropdown list.

• Visual:   (25.00 %)

• Auditory:

• Reading:

• Kinesthetic:    (75.00 %)

Comment:

The results derived from this question were not surprising and only confirmed assumptions I had made of the group beforehand. These assumptions were taken from sessions I had with them only 2 weeks prior, along with the general assumption that TPA students on the Production strand are, by their very presence on a highly vocational and practical course, prone to be either kinesthetic or visual learners. Of course these assumptions cannot replace a direct declaration from the students themselves, which was the split aim of the exercise.

11. Choose your secondary learning style from the dropdown list.

• Visual:     (50.00 %)

• Auditory:

• Reading:     (25.00 %)

• Kinesthetic:    (25.00 %)

Comment:

Gardner writes that intelligence and subsequent learning can be accessed through several styles (Gardner,2006). This question was designed to simplify Gardner’s theory and present it as the VARK model, acknowledging that most individuals can accomodate several different and often diverse learning styles.

12. Any other comments?

• i blogged for you

• Q9 is only because I want to do SM otherwise probably rarely.

Kirkpatrick D.L & Kirkpatrick J.D (1994) Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd Edition) San Francisco: Berrette-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

J. Lowder, & D. Hagan. (1999, June 27 – July, 1999). “Web-based student feedback to improve learning” in proceedings of the Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education conference, Cracow, Poland.

P. Nanlohy, & G. Munns. (2000, December, 2000). “A virtual tutorial – engagement and encounter in an on-line learning community” in proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education annual conference, Sydney.

Barbara Cagniard, Jeff A. Beeler, Jonathan P. Britt, Daniel S. McGehee, Michela Marinelli, Xiaoxi Zhuang (2006)Dopamine Scales Performance in the Absence of New Learning Neuron – 7 September 2006 (Vol. 51, Issue 5, pp. 541-547)

Gardner, H (2006), Mutliple Intelligences New Horizons Basic Books