In Progress

By Jacqueline Kampman, Associate Teaching Professor, Psychology

Walking down the hallway of the first floor in Old Main, this quotation on the wall catches my eye as I pass by. I can’t help but reflect:  How am I being kind, calm and safe? What leadership do I provide my students as they each navigate their own COVID-19 circumstances? How does my teaching promote their kindness, calmness and safety as well as their understanding of and concern for others with differing levels of safety and calmness from themselves?

Coming back to in-person classes in September 2021 was both exciting and anxiety-provoking. There were varying degrees of eagerness to get back to in-person classes for both students and teaching faculty. We expressed varying degrees of uncertainty and hesitancy as well. How would I navigate and accommodate these differences in perceived levels of safety, calmness and even kindness? How would I help students navigate the different expectations for in-person vs. on-line attendance and assessments that they would potentially experience as their teachers were not all “on the same page” with respect to perceptions of safe learning practices for themselves and their students?

As I planned and navigated my return to in-person classes, safety became my primary focus – both physical and mental health safety. My definition of safety included considerations of the kindness and calmness that Bonnie Henry had advised. A consideration of physical safety was perhaps the easiest in my mind to convey. I reviewed safety mandates both in-person and on-line: I aimed to be respectful, calm and kind and in turn expected the same from my students. However, dilemmas inevitably arose: Do I remove my own mask to speak or not? I do have the physical distancing to do so; it will help my students to more clearly hear me. But how might students’ sense of comfort and safety be impacted? Ultimately, I decided to remove my mask when I was in a physically safe zone to do so. I clarified that I would keep my mask on if even one person expressed discomfort. Students could do this anonymously. Rules were easily established regarding closer contact and mandatory mask-wearing.

A more time-consuming consideration was how to best promote mental health safety. Prior to the pandemic, I did not use Moodle. Returning to campus in September 2021, my initial motivation to continue using Moodle alongside in-person teaching had more to do with the perceived uncertainties regarding class attendance. Not only would students be more comfortable in navigating this on-line space should cancellation of classes be necessary, but individual students who missed classes would be supported. All lecture outlines and resources were posted; classroom participation was assessed in on-line forums; and assignments completed using various Moodle tools. This resulted in a level of calmness amongst my students as they were assured that they would have on-going access to class participation via Moodle if necessary for themselves and they were being acquainted with the types of Moodle tools that would be essential if a complete return to on-line classes were necessary. I assured my students that we were in this together: we could make this work even if circumstances were to suddenly change. We would protect and support each other. Our learning would continue.

Continuing to use the available Moodle resources has supported my students’ well-being in a variety of additional ways. For instance, I have observed an increased preparation for and participation in my in-person classroom. Student confidence in expressing ideas in-person has been enhanced by requiring completion of on-line forums: Students are receiving a greater exposure to differences in their thought and perspectives; they can see other students’ perspectives in written form as well as hear these in oral form. They encounter good (and poor) models of forum answers; they can self-correct through their reading of on-line comments as well as their in-class participation; they are able to learn from their errors in a “low stake” way. Overall, they feel (and are) more prepared for class; their anxiety regarding class participation is reduced. Some students have commented that they had “forgotten” how to have in-person discussions due to their past year of being isolated. They value the regained opportunity to have such discussions with the support of the required online forum preparation.

In my reflections on mental health safety, I have come to realize that my needs as a teacher in addition to those of my students should be considered. Being kind, calm, and safe should extend to myself as well. I am teaching on campus: There is a limit to the amount of time I should spend preparing on-line resources in addition to in-class course delivery and teaching. My mental well-being is important and is supported by a healthy work-home life balance.

As new challenges have arisen along with the Omicron variant and its impact on our current Winter 2022 term, I continue to reflect on how to best “immunize” my students. The needs of our students (and ourselves) as we “survive” this pandemic are extensive and varied.  What will be the new reality of teaching and learning as we “recover”? How can we best prepare?

Even though some restrictions have been lifted and others will be soon, I encourage you all to continue to “Be kind, be calm, be safe” as you continue to navigate this changing reality for yourselves and your students.

By John Churchly

I have been an educator for a combined 38 years at School District #73 (Kamloops/Thompson) and at TRU. I have taught teachers in the B.Ed. and M.Ed. programs as well as in workshops as an educational developer (K-16). Yet, when I read Dr. Mahtab Nazemi’s CELT blog a few weeks ago, “Classroom Time Management: Strategies in Response to Over/Under Planning,” I had to face my own instructional shortcomings. You see, occasionally during a lesson I run out of material early and scramble to add in a small group discussion… or I give the class an extra-long break to go to Common Grounds Coffee during my evening class. Much more frequently I over plan and then find myself making drastic cuts on the fly during a lesson. Sometimes I talk too much; sometimes I’m too much of a Captain Video (like my grade 9 Social Studies teacher – although they were actually filmstrips not videos then); and sometimes I shortchange students on think time and discussion time to make up for my excesses. I have to admit that I’m aware of it – I’ve just chosen not to change my behaviour as my content and ideas are just too brilliant to skip any of them(?!). However, in the spirit of self-improvement and explicitly modeling what I teach to teachers about instructional practices, and after reading the blog, I am changing my ways.

This blog post is not an extension of Dr. Nazemi’s thoughtful and thorough description of how to manage instructional time. Rather, it is an example of time management in action with an accompanying resource I built along the way.

I have always estimated how much time things will take in my classes, but it’s never been more than a rough guess. Sometimes it works perfectly, and sometimes I can be off by an hour or more. To rectify this, especially teaching synchronous online classes due to the pandemic, I have built a spreadsheet to help calculate the exact amount of time for each activity and to identify the time on the clock at various points during my lesson as suggested by Dr. Nazemi.

The spreadsheet is based on PowerPoint slides as the building blocks of the class. This is not to say PowerPoint is and should be the basis of all (or any) lessons. It is simply an organizing structure for what I want to cover, and the slides conveniently provide something for students to look at other than my messy hair and office on BigBlueButton (or even worse – live in a classroom).

I start with by entering the class start time (in 24hour format). Then I assign each PowerPoint slide a number of minutes for my talk time. This is still an estimate but given that I’m estimating at the granular slide level, my estimates are far more accurate than guessing the amount of time for a whole lecture. I can also rehearse them to make sure I’m accurate. As I integrate student activities and video clips during various points in the presentation, I include time estimates for them in separate columns. While in the past I’ve used back-of-the-envelope guesses of how much time to use for student activities, I’m now moving to more structured activities that have set (granular) times. An example is 1-2-4-All from Liberating Structures (the version known to K-12 educators is Think-Pair-Share). The total time for 1-2-4-All is 12 minutes. I use a timer on my watch (or phone) to ensure I follow the exact times. Of course, I’m flexible to take more or less time as needed, but I do it thoughtfully and strategically rather than throwing away my timing with great abandon.

All the times for each slide (my talk time, student activity time, and video time) are automatically summed and added to the clock time to indicate the actual time for each slide to occur. The spreadsheet also sums the total number of minutes of teacher talk time, student activity time, and video time as well as giving relative proportions for each (here’s a sample filled-in spreadsheet). Usually when I start the planning process, I’m well over the amount of class time available, and I’m forced to adjust my activities, the number of slides, and how much I want to talk. Once I’m happy with the total amount of time and the proportions of teacher-talk to student activity and videos, I highlight key slides and their times on the spreadsheet that I use as reference points during the lesson. Of course, this is to avoid looking at the spreadsheet every two minutes for each slide. When I check the highlighted times during my lesson, I’m looking at them as targets and I can adjust the rest of my lesson if I’m over/under by too much.

The spreadsheet is as much a planning tool as an in-the-moment guide for my lessons. However, the spreadsheet has an additional benefit. It provides me with documentation of my teaching practice, including the relative proportion of teacher talk time to student activity time. When writing my APAR (or tenure/promotion dossier), I can analyse this documentation (alongside student evaluations) to consider if there are enough student activities (and whether they are efficacious or just busy work to fill time).  Using the spreadsheets for a whole term, I can show over time that I’ve adjusted my teaching to respond to students’ comments and my own analysis.

It is certainly acceptable and sometimes wise to drop a planned lesson timing and go with a teachable moment or abandon a lesson component that is just not working. But day in, day out, I want to come to my classes well-prepared, and I also want to be able to answer the questions: Do I talk too much? Do I give inadequate think time? Am I Captain Video?  If yes, mea culpa!

By Naowarat (Ann) Cheeptham and Carol Rees

We were thrilled to be asked to share the outcome of our curiosity-driven inquiry-based learning research project that was led by Dr. Carol Rees. Though Dr. Rees lives now in Ireland and is retired from teaching at TRU, she continues to be active in research and is still leading our team. Our team shares a passion for life-long learning community and creating curiosity culture between K-16 educators. In 2020, Drs. Carol Rees (Principal Investigator), Michelle Harrison, and Ann Cheeptham collaborated with Christine Miller (TRU), Morgan Whitehouse, Elizabeth deVries, and Grady Sjokvist from SD73 to apply for a Partnership Engage Grant (PEG). We were awarded $24,662 from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) for our project entitled “Supporting curiosity-driven inquiry-based science education online through a community-of-inquiry partnership: rethinking pedagogical approaches during the Covid-19 pandemic.” Our team has also included Lorri Weaver and Hannah Allen as research assistants.

Fourteen science teachers K-12 from the Kamloops Thompson School District (SD#73)–Melody Steffenson, Hilary Villeneuve, Serena Reves, Amanda Straker, Jenn Filek, Laura Syms, Brandy Turner, Kim Lavigne, Chris Spanis, Sharmane Baerg, Courtney Bruin, Monica Bergeron and Lisa Galloway–and four TRU faculty members–Drs. Lyn Baldwin, Nancy Flood, Tory Anchikoski, and Crystal Huscroft–participated in the project.

To achieve our goal, we created a Community of Inquiry (COI) from middle and high school teachers and university instructors dedicated to sharing knowledge of their experiences and from the literature to support curiosity-driven inquiry-based science education online, face-to-face with social distancing, and a hybrid of the two (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). The COI was established as an online space, founded on the principle of three shared presences: social, cognitive, and teaching, established for participants by facilitators to create conditions to promote collaborative discovery and the co-creation of knowledge. In this one-year PEG supported project, the participants in the COI worked with facilitators from our research group through cycles of discussion, planning, trial in their own school and university classrooms, and reflection. Our research study was integrated into the COI so that findings from each cycle were brought back to the participants for the next cycle. In this way, knowledge was generated and built upon over the year.

Besides a conference presentation and a manuscript-in-preparation, a successful open learning resource (OER) was created and is now live for all interested teachers and faculty to access at this link: https://scienceinquiry.opened.ca/. The OER takes the form of blog posts from participating teachers and faculty members.

Reference:
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

by Mahtab Nazemi, Education

Over 15 years of teaching experience in K-12 and Post-Secondary combined have taught me a few useful things, to say the least. In my current role, working with Teacher Candidates (otherwise called Pre-Service Teachers), I have been very lucky to make my teaching practice visible as it contributes to my students’ and my own learning and improvement. It’s such a relief to be able to stop myself in the middle of something and exclaim: “Please don’t do what I just did! That could have gone more smoothly – any ideas of what I could have done differently?”

Recently when grading student lesson plans, I remembered a couple of important strategies that I would like to get back to consistently implementing. Like many conscientious teachers, I over-plan. I do this time and time again, even if it’s the fifth year in a row that I’m teaching the course. I know better. Every time I teach a course I have already taught, it still feels like a new prep. I re-plan because I want to do things differently all the time, and I want to bring in new materials, readings, and activities that I didn’t get a chance to use in prior iterations of the course. Because this is blog post and not a full-length paper, I will focus on only two strategies that have helped me, and I hope that they can help you with your time management.

I take notes on my lesson, right in Moodle. We all have an idea of how long something will take, or at least how long we hope it will take, so what about when it’s all done? So, here’s what I do in Moodle to help me with time management in the classroom. I will add a few lines about how the lesson went that day (and keep it hidden from students). I will write something like this:

• “This lesson was too long. Would be best to happen over the course of two
  classes.”
• “Cut this part of the lesson because they didn’t need this much introduction
  and background knowledge. (First make sure that future groups of
  students also already learned about this in prerequisite class)”
• “Next time, do a jigsaw activity for this reading. It’s super dense and long,
  but luckily something that can be broken into smaller chunks.”

If you’ve never done a jigsaw activity, but would like to try, here are a few more words about it. Oh, and by the way, it can work well in Mathematics class too!!! Assign this reading as 5 sections, assigning each random group of 5 students one of the sections. In class, have section-groups meet to discuss the specific part they read and feel ‘as expert as possible’ on that section. (If the reading or mathematics problems, etc., were not assigned in advance of this class, then this would be time for them to first read/solve the problems, then have a discussion about being an expert on the section.) Then arrange students in new groups made up of one person from each section – so that all 5 parts are represented in each new group. This second group arrangement will meet for longer than the first one did, to discuss the whole reading, part by part, now with expertise from each section.

With the above notes captured in your Moodle site, when you import this course shell next time you teach the course, you now have some self-assessments that will help you do a version of the same lesson, but so much better!

The second piece I’d like to mention, in regard to time management in the classroom, has to do with the “ordre du jour,” or the agenda for the day. If my class runs from 8:30am to 9:20am, for example, rather than having estimates for time in minutes, I include the actual time, like this:

Instead of:	Try this:
Attendance                                             5 mins Group Discussion                                15 mins Lecture & Notes                                    20 mins Questions & Next Lesson               10 mins	Attendance                                  8:30-8:35 Group Discussion                       8:35-8:50 Lecture & Notes                          8:50-9:10 Questions & Next Lesson          9:10-9:20

Having the actual time, rather than the expected minutes, makes it much easier to glance at the clock or your watch and know that you’re on track for finishing all the things in your lesson within the allotted time. I know this might seem simple, but it’s super helpful! Even as a Mathematics teacher, it takes me too long to see 20 minutes in my lesson, and then figure out what time that corresponds to, and then decide if I’ve being yapping too long or if I’ve left enough time for the rest of the activities that day. Now relatedly, this is something you can adjust for future lessons, based on making a note (in Moodle or elsewhere) if something took more or less time than you had originally planned.

Hope these tips are helpful for you! If you would like to chat about this post, or any other thing related to teaching, please reach out.

By Lorry-Ann Austin, Faculty of Education and Social Work
Jamie Noakes and Tara Bond, Career and Experiential Learning
Oleksandr (Sasha) Kondrashov, Faculty of Education and Social Work
Lian Dumouchel, Faculty of Adventure, Culinary Arts, and Tourism
Carolyn Hoessler, Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching
Alana Hoare, Office of Quality Assurance 

We set SAIL! Specifically, we launched and collaborated on the 2021 SAIL, the Strategic Assessment of Institutional Learning, pilot of TRU.  

Through SAIL we aimed to pilot a faculty-led approach to assessing student achievement of TRU’s institutional learning outcomes (ILO). In Winter 2021, we chose an ILO and joined faculty colleagues in a small group that we called an ILO Pod. Together, we co-created a shared rubric for the ILO. After the end of the term, we assessed student assignments from each others’ courses to provide ratings and a report to each other for reflection. This first pilot focused on Lifelong Learning, Social Responsibility, and Critical Thinking and Investigation, which are the ILOs that we taught. We will continue with these ILOs in Winter 2022. Later SAIL-ings (pilots) will focus on the remaining ILOs.

Through our cross-disciplinary collaboration via SAIL ILO Pods, we valued the opportunity to deepen our understanding about the ILO of focus. Our colleagues provided a fresh set of eyes on our assignments, and the discussions about how we assessed the ILOs prompted great insight and revisiting of our courses. The collaboration offered new conceptualizations of ILO application and inspiration for assessment. We also valued the opportunity to share our exciting work on campus and at an international conference. SAIL additionally confirmed student learning around the ILO and increased student understanding of the benefits of general education. 

We built on the work of colleagues across TRU including the ILOs created by the General Education Taskforce, and the Principles for learning outcomes and assessment from the Learning Outcomes and Assessment Taskforce. 

Our discussions and post-report debrief provided insights that informed the SAIL report, the recommendations being consulted on across campus, an Assessment Institute presentation, and a recent CELTalk. Our adventures can be found on the SAIL website. We look forward to continuing with the ILO Pods that we enjoyed, trying a new consent process and platform, and selecting assignments in late fall for a winter term SAIL-ing. Carolyn and Alana are also gathering feedback on the SAIL Recommendations and the Learning Outcomes and Assessment Principles. 

Recommendations & Next Steps – Come SAIL with us! 

Two recommendations arose from the research findings of our pilots, which the Learning Outcome and Assessment Task force is actively seeking feedback on through Faculty Council and curriculum committee presentations, as well as engaging with TRUSU Student Caucus this Fall. We are recommending the continuation of the SAIL research pilot, which includes the establishment of ILO Pods for TRU’s eight ILOs. The ILO Pods will be coordinated through the Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) and supported by faculty learning and development coordinators. We will continue to explore the value of interdisciplinary rubrics to provide ratings of a subset of student assignments in ILO courses. For more details about the recommendations see the SAIL 2021 Pilot report and Fall 2021 feedback survey. 

We are about to start Season 2 of SAIL with the ILO rubrics for Lifelong Learning, Social Responsibility, and Critical Thinking and Investigation. If you are teaching an ILO course, come SAIL with us! 

By Carolyn Ives, Coordinator, Learning and Faculty Development, CELT

We are nearly two-thirds through the fall term, and I’m wondering how you all are doing: Has the fall term been energizing for you? Has it been challenging? Or has it been a bit of both?

If you’re happy to be back on campus but still struggling sometimes with the transition, you are not alone. For many, this has been a challenging fall term: just as we all had to learn to work remotely, and students had to learn to study remotely, we have all had to re-learn how to work together in person, sometimes while still integrating virtual interactions. For students who in previous terms could leave cameras off and listen anonymously, this semester of being visible in the classroom context may leave some feeling exposed and vulnerable. For faculty who spent many hours creating and delivering online content, some are now wondering if those hours were lost as they are considering whether the materials they created are still useful and useable. The ground is still shifting for some.

The nature of face-to-face work has changed, also. For example, even though I’m back on campus, my days are a mix of interacting and connecting with colleagues in person and online—and still mostly online. The transition back to face-to-face may never fully happen, as we now realize the value and convenience of online meetings, especially for including colleagues who might otherwise not be able to engage. There are definitely both pros and cons to our new reality.

One thing that hasn’t changed, though, is the value of extending grace to each other and to students as we continue to navigate this new context together. I was reminded this weekend about the importance of what Valerie Palmer-Mehta (2016) refers to as “radical acts of caring-listening”—acts of humanity that bring us closer to professional humility, authenticity, curiosity, and collaboration. I was thinking about this in reference to a conference proposal that examines the work of educational developers and how they can work more effectively with other faculty members on both individual and institutional levels in light of shifting power dynamics. It occurred to me, too, that this kind of approach also works for faculty-student interactions. What would happen if we approached all our interactions with students and with each other in this fashion? What if we listened more and didn’t jump to conclusions or make assumptions about what our colleagues and students wanted, needed, or intended? This kind of work takes more time, and communication is often challenging at the best of times, but the result is absolutely worth the time and effort.

Writing the proposal reminded me that I can be more intentional about applying radical acts of caring-listening in my interactions. I appreciated this reminder, especially in the busy moments of a rapidly moving fall term.

Palmer-Mehta, V. (2016). Theorizing listening as a tool for social change: Andrea Dworkin’s discourses on listening. International Journal of Communication 10. pp. 4176-4192.

By Laura Grizzlypaws
Educational Developer, Indigenous Education CELT
St’át’imc | Ecw7úcwalmicw

 

Throughout Indigenous histories, since time immemorial, our ancestors’ lives were based on an oral cultural way of life and still is to this present day. Our Indigenous histories, lessons, life, and knowledge was passed down orally for countless generations to sustain cultures and our unique authentic identities. One of the greatest gifts that I believe I mastered was the art of storytelling through songs. The ability to sing, and to ability to compose songs that articulate and reflect the values and beliefs and even current issues we face as Indigenous peoples.

To me, singing, is a powerful tool and skill in the lives of Indigenous peoples. Singing songs is a strong part of a cultural heritage of people, family, and individuals. It embodies the spiritual relationship of the songs to the animate, inanimate, and natural phenomenon.  For example, when a child was born a song was sung; when a new day came, a song was sung symbolizing the relationship of a person to the star world. When a person passed onto the spirit world, a song was sung; when a couple united in marriage, a song was sung; when the people harvested, a song was sung; and, when the people danced a song was sung. There are so many songs sung by Indigenous peoples, happy songs, love songs, wailing songs, grieving songs, ceremonial songs, prayer songs, appreciation songs, and songs sung even for the land, the earth, the air, and the water. Within Indigenous cultures, being an oral culture, songs played and continue to play a huge role influencing others of storing and sharing information knowledge and wisdom.

Around campus, in and out of the community you will hear Indigenous peoples sing songs and share the role of their songs sung. These songs shared, are shared to reinforce the collective identities of Indigenous peoples. Many songs are sung and shared by a people and even between nations. Songs sung are ways of empowering, educating, bringing people together creating awareness of Indigenous wisdom through voice.  Singing songs was a way of transferring knowledge, providing support, and sharing information. Songs sung at events provide support and uplift the energy and spirit of the people and its purpose to honor past, present, and future generations.

Songs sung are sung with lyrics combined with a chant in a way that affect both emotional, social, and intellectual aspects of a listener. Indigenous people’s epistemologies are a way of honoring their connections to seven generations into the past (ancestral), current generations and seven generations into the future (including the ones not yet born).  Songs appeal to a people’s minds, hearts and spirits combining all four aspects of a human’s ability mentally, physically, spiritually, and emotionally. All songs that are sung, are and or were created are based on the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual processes one’s experiences. Many songs sung using a hand drum, are old songs, that have been passed down orally for countless generations symbolizing community, family, and social responsibility to ensure the songs continue to be passed on to future generations.

However, Indigenous music continues to grow through the art of contemporary music. Most importantly the contemporary oral art of music still celebrates and honor the values and principles of sharing important knowledge, information, and education of Indigenous issues.

The song titled “Come Home,” sung by Grizzlypaws at the Indigenous Music Awards Festival recorded by powwows.com, is sung through Indigenous Languages of Canada and the United States (English, Carrier – Dakelh, Cree, Sahaptin, Nlha7kapmecw, Dine-Navajo, and St’at’imc). This is an example in which Indigenous peoples have used music to become a part of social movements based on the values and principles of their identities as Indigenous communities.  This song was created and dedicated to the Missing Murdered Indigenous Women (MMIW) Come Home, Come on Home, This is the Land You Call Home, Come Home, Come on Home, This is the Land, You Should have Known Laura Grizzlypaws – 2019 Indigenous Music Awards – YouTube.

By Diane Janes, Coordinator, Learning and Faculty Development, CELT

As a new faculty member here at TRU (I arrived in late August) and in CELT (Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching) along with making the move between provinces in the middle of a pandemic, I have been thinking about how we ‘survived’ the past 18 months and what might our plans would/could be, to take what we have learned (pre and during the pandemic) and put it back into the classroom we left (post pandemic), in what feels like, so long ago.  This got me focused on an idea that is being used globally called pandemic pedagogy.

So, what is pandemic pedagogy? If you have never heard of it, you would not be alone.  For those of us with online and blended teaching and learning experiences, pre-pandemic, it would be some of the technology enhanced tools, activities, and engagement strategies that we employed both inside and outside of our physical classrooms. TRU’s faculty via the CELT blog (https://celt.trubox.ca/) was instrumental in offering multiple perspectives on this idea early in the pandemic shift.

This idea was first introduced to us in March 2020 when a global pandemic was declared and every one of us more traditional Face2Face educators found ourselves in what was then being called ‘remote teaching and learning’.  I personally called it a ‘duct tape and bandages’ approach to teaching and learning.  We had to ‘pivot’ in days, to remote teaching – remote from our classrooms, remote from our students and colleagues, and remote from our campus.

It was as strange to our learners as it was to us.  Suddenly learning management systems (LMS) such as Moodle (used here at TRU) became vital (beyond how some of us had been using this tool), we learned to navigate zoom and MS teams and started to rethink our pedagogy, by the fall, to become more asynchronous and less synchronous in our teaching (where this made sense); we started to look to see how we could blend the two and engage our learners from wherever they were and wherever we were!

While the pandemic did catch us off guard, and as a serious health care crisis globally, it did send us all home for 18 or more months; but did our pedagogy really change? Or did we simply see the value of the pedagogy we used and then look for a way to ‘translate’ it to our new learning environment?  My intent here is not to define pandemic pedagogy (lots of the current literature does that already) but to look to see how what we learned about teaching and learning at this time can be kept and nurtured as we move forward into post pandemic times.

For me, this translation is one of the keys to the whole question of what IS a pandemic pedagogy or any form of crisis pedagogy.

For many of us, I am not sure the pandemic changed the way we taught – the underlying pedagogy – but it did challenge all of us, even those of us experienced in the online and blended world, to ‘rethink’ how effective we could be in our classrooms (physical and virtual) and to look to translate content/ideas/ engagement where necessary and to rework content/ideas/engagement where necessary; and to find in technology (potentially) solutions to educational gaps or questions from our physical classrooms, that have been befuddling us for years!

It helped us think outside of the classroom ‘box’ we knew and had us looking for ways to create the classroom we needed, to help our learners move though the year in a way that was meaningful, useful, and enduring.  We needed to build not only our own techno-resiliency but foster and grow it within our learners.

And we did it…and we will continue to do it…until the pandemic is declared over. But what then?

The OTHER key to the pandemic pedagogy question, is how you keep what YOU learned about teaching and learning, the changes to your own classroom questions, present and accounted for in your physical (and virtual classrooms), beyond the pandemic.  The technology (mini lectures, simulations, video, podcasts, and beyond) can now be remediation tools; maybe the discussion boards can keep the classroom discussions beyond the boundaries of the physical classroom; possibly the next solution to a classroom gap or question can be found in some of the tools you learned to incorporate into your teaching in the past 18 months.

And perhaps even more critically, how do you keep what your learners have learned about their own resiliency over the past 18 months, part of your continued mentoring and guidance for them?

These questions are not easily answered, but many of us have been writing about what some of these solutions might be.  Things we should put into place for the next pandemic, or climate change impact or unknown that might reconstruct our classrooms as we know them today.  This prepares not only us for future change, but also creates that mindset in our learners who will be the change in the future.

 

Here are a few resources curated to start the conversation:

Ahmed, V., & Opoku, A. (2021). Technology supported learning and pedagogy in times of crisis: the case of COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10706-w

Bautista, J. (2021). Pandemic pedagogy: Teaching continuity in times of global disruption. Guest Editor, Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia, 29. https://kyotoreview.org/pandemic-pedagogy/teaching-continuity-in-times-of-global-disruption/

CELT Blog. (2020-2021). Pandemic Pedagogy Tips 1-4. https://celt.trubox.ca/

Cutrara, S. (2020). In conversation with Dr. Sarah Glassford (Pandemic Pedagogy convo 18).  Imagining a new ‘we”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS0sOKRVsbs

Janes, D. P., & Carter, L.M. (2020). Empowering Techno-resiliency and practical learning among teachers: Leveraging a community of practice model using Microsoft Teams. In Ferdig, R.E., Baumgartner, E., Hartshorne, R., Kaplan-Rakowski, R. & Mouza, C. (Eds). Teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Stories from the field. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); p. 265-273. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/216903/

Rippé, C.B., Weisfeld-Spolter, S., Yurova, Y., & Kemp, A. (2021). Pandemic pedagogy for the new normal: Fostering perceived control during COVID-19. Journal of Marketing Education, 43(2), 260-276. doi:10.1177/0273475320987287

Schley, S. & Marchetti, C.E. (2021). Pandemic transformation of teaching and learning: Designing pedagogy using the contents of Instructors’ “Pedagogical Pantry,” rather than “Established Recipes.” Journal of Transformational Learning (Special Issue: Disrupted Learning Amid the Pandemic), 8(1). https://jotl.uco.edu/index.php/jotl/article/view/427

Schwartzman, R. (2020). Performing pandemic pedagogy. Communication Education, 69(4), 502-517, DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2020.1804602

By Lindsey McKay, Assistant Teaching Professor, Sociology

Debates are well-known as live events full of strong arguments, heated controversy, nerves, and lively theatrics. They are a great way to achieve the critical thinking and investigation institutional learning outcome. In the 2020 pivot to an online mode of delivery, the successful team debates I held in my second year Medical Sociology course looked doomed. The standard individual essay would have to replace the interaction and critical thinking learned through debates. Before I jettisoned this effective learning activity, I reached out to TRU’s instructional designers. That is when everything changed.

When I met Instructional Designer Marie Bartlett, I recall her metaphorically rubbing her hands together, saying, “hmmm, I love figuring out these learning puzzles.” Several joint sessions later, after investing what felt like weeks improving my Moodle skills, out came a multi-stage, concurrent, asynchronous debate activity-assessment in Moodle!

What does it look like?

The online debate activity-assessment has four stages.

Step 1: Students form groups with 6-7 members; each group addresses a unique debate topic expressed as a proposition statement.

Step 2: Students research their debate topic. This is a graded assessment. (I use annotated bibliographies.)

Step 3: The debate! All debates start and end over the same two-day period in a discussion forum. It is asynchronous with a deadline for the first post and at least five back-and-forth posts responding to group members. All students must cite evidence (with permalinks to TRU library articles) and write a ‘pro’ and ‘con’ argument in a long first post in response to their proposition statement.

Step 4: Final graded product (final position and reflection on what they learned)

The following pictograph, created by Marie for the Makerspace event we hosted in May, illustrates the steps, and adds the Moodle resources and tools:

How did it go?

Students liked this learning activity-assessment. Many remarked in their reflections that they had to stretch their way of thinking to write a ‘pro’ or ‘con’ argument, counter to their real position. Reading the research and responding to others’ points was appreciated. Anonymous feedback included the following comments.

• “I liked how I was able to engage and interact with my peers. This was a very useful tool for honing in on our research skills. It is also great for critical thinking and challenging ourselves to view a problem from two different angles.”
• “The debate is a great idea. I loved it but I think that it was a bit confusing too to understand how it was going to be made. Having to post in both sides (pro and cons) was hard and interesting but confusing to be able to think in both arguments.”
• “I liked how we were able to have time to thoughtfully and respectfully respond to our peers with scholarly evidence without any pressure. I also liked being able to read back what others argued back with, being able to access their sources later to continue my own learning on the topic.”
• “It really challenged me to consider all points relevant and ensure sufficient evidence to support me and to include alternative approaches.”

What I learned

In F20, I learned that it was challenging for many students to do teamwork online. I resolved this by switching to individual grading; replacing the word “team” with “group.”

In W21, I learned not to go too far in minimizing reliance on one another aspect of the activity. The two-day event is very exciting as students, organized into six different groups, start to post and engage with one-another. The flurry of posts create an exciting momentum. This worked really well for five groups but one group flopped. De-emphasizing group interaction was to blame. Next time, I will impose stricter posting requirements and ensure students know their group is counting on them.

What is neat about working online is the role the software plays in shaping the design of a learning activity. One Moodle feature key to the debates was using a discussion forum type called “QandA.” I posted a ‘question,’ in this case inviting responses to the proposition statements, and the students ‘answered’ by posting their first long arguments. Only after posting can students see other students’ posts. This means no one can lean on or be influenced by the work of other students.

From Online to Blended

Now facing the return to campus, how do I pivot back? My plan is to retain the online portion and add an in-class final round of debate. Groups will debate sequentially instead of concurrently. By blending online with face-to-face modes, I will not lose the greatest strength of the online debate: citing evidence! It is far more difficult for students to clearly articulate and share scholarship supporting their arguments with the speed and time constraints of a live debate.

Each mode supports different skills sets for learners. In addition to citing scholarship, online is a slower pace that allows for deep thinking and develops writing skills. In-person requires learners to be even more prepared, think on their feet and develops oral skills. A blending should be the best of both worlds.

Interested in creating or comparing how you do debates in your course? I’d love to hear from you. Please contact me at lmckay@tru.ca. You can also download a debate OER Marie and I made from the CRICKET.trubox site, and, by request, import what I created directly into your Moodle shell.

By Christina Cederlof

In outrigger canoeing, when your boat flips, it is called a huli. Hulis happen suddenly. There you were, giving it your all, paddling towards the finish line, and bam, all of a sudden you are in the water. The water feels shockingly cold; waves toss you about, and it is disorienting. Immediately, you must take stock of your team. Is there anyone trapped under the boat? Injured? With everyone accounted for, the paddles and bailing buckets need to be assembled as soon as possible, or you will literally be going down the river without a paddle(s).

The March 2020 pivot was a lot like a huli. And, because there was additional uncertainty—initially we were told practicums would continue—my students and I were in the water, treading for two weeks until it became clear the practicums could not continue as businesses were shutting down due to the pandemic. I was told to find a way to get us to the finish line of that academic year, and so I did. I assembled a rudimentary craft, and our binding material was the strong community we had built over the year. This kept us meeting regularly in the Big Blue Button, and our final class was a celebration during which everyone told each other what we appreciated the most about each other. The experience reinforced for me the importance and strength that comes from building community.

The summer of 2020 was, well, an exercise in boat building. Clearly, I needed to build a different boat. With my comfortable F2F boat not able to do the job, I started to build a new boat using a model about which I had limited knowledge. I did have incredible boat building guides, though, by the names of Carolyn Ives, Matthew Stranach, and Brenna Clarke Gray. I attended a lot of building seminars to get ideas and to start building my new boat. With a boat built enough to float, we started the year.

My first task was to teach my students how to get into the boat. This involved phone calls, individual video conferencing sessions, and sometimes a referral to IT Services to download the software they needed (Office 365). Once in the boat, very quickly the students (and I) needed to learn how to paddle this new boat. For the students’ fall practicum, this also involved getting parents or, in some cases, grandparents, to help coach their paddler to develop transferable skills while in their Covid-safe bubble. In the end, the students (and I) became comfortable with our new boat (Big Blue Button, Moodle, online Office 365, as well as some online courses in Customer Service); I want to acknowledge fully the continued support I received from my boat building guides (Carolyn, Matthew, and Brenna) throughout the year, a much-needed safety boat that motored alongside us. The past 16 months were very much a time of building the boat as we paddled, and had it not been for my support team and the dedication of the students and their parents, we would not have made it to the finish line.

Now, as I look to July and August 2021, I am faced with the need to build another new boat. I am not convinced that this boat will be anything like the boat I had before the pandemic, even with the return to campus. For one, I have changed as a paddler.  And there were successes resulting from paddling the boat of 2020-21. Some of those involved the students needing to be more independent and, at times, digging in to learn a new stroke or enlisting others to also learn that stroke with them. I also appreciated that the craft held all our learning in it and thus it was easy to refer students back to a stroke development they needed more practice on. It was all in digital form, so we saved a lot in photocopying (cost and paper waste) and so helpful for all to say, “it is still in Moodle.”

What will the 2021-2022 boat look like? I cannot see it being anything but a hybrid of the two boats I now have some knowledge of how to build and paddle (F2F and online). We are preparing ourselves for a return to normal, but normal has changed. This summer I will build my boat again (and I will take a much-needed rest). The boat (Moodle shell) will look a lot like the boat of 2020-21, but hopefully I will be able to demonstrate the strokes and cheer my students on in person.

I am proud of the work that was accomplished in 2020-21, and while I knew I was a capable F2F boat builder and coach, I learnt that I could be a competent online boat builder and motivator as well. While this past year has been described as the one like non-other and the one that tested our resilience, this coming year will test our trust in is the danger really gone (?), and we will need to be brave.