1

“M”- ness and the Student ExperienceM-Level PGCE

ESCalate SeminarFriday March 2nd 2007

LJMU M-PGCE

Developing Reflective Professional Practice24 L3 Credits

Subject Pedagogy20 M Credits

LT & A20 M Credits

• Critical analysis of the subject in the curriculum

• Review of pedagogy

• Lit review and research proposal

• Project report

• Three reflective reviews following each phase of training• Linked to QTT Standards and school experience

SEPT JUNEJAN

2

Issues Arising

Teaching and Learning• Developing an M level pedagogy• Supporting students in developing M level academic

skills and expectations• Increasing level of independence of students

Assessment• Defining M-levelness• Making assessment tasks meaningful• Drafting assessment outcomes / criteria / descriptors• Quality assurance through marking and moderation

Impact – Early Years PGCE

• Interview – group discussion on an article (trial 2007)

• Early induction day (July) – share expectations

• More taught sessions earlier on in course –encourage reading, writing, thinking and engaging at M level

Nicola Whiteside

3

Impact – Early Years PGCE

• 12 hours contact time a week (plus tutorial support) – structure enables time for reflection

• Schools – made aware of impact/benefits

Nicola Whiteside

Impact – Early Years PGCE

• Originally – two assignments for each module

• Now- one larger more in depth assignment for each

Nicola Whiteside

4

Impact – Early Years PGCE

• Assignments – student ownership

Moderation• Year 1- all double marked (only 20 on

course) and all sent to external• Year 2 – 10 double marked, these sent to

external

Nicola Whiteside

Impact – Early Years PGCE

• Level 3 module – work at M level –assessed at Level 3

• Year 1 – focus on M level – 1 student achieved M level credits but not QTS

• Year 2- all likely to achieve QTS but 1 not passed L and T 1

Nicola Whiteside

5

Module assessment information

• Two assessment components– Coursework: 30%: Poster presentation focused on an

aspect of learners' conceptual understanding in the subject (1500 words equivalent)

– Coursework: 70%: Critical analysis of an aspect of pedagogy in your subject area (3500 words)

• Focus on poster presentation

Phil Duggan

The assessment task

• Produce an A0 poster on the following theme: How do you see the role and nature of your subject in the defined curriculum?– How do you consider the role and nature of your

subject in the curriculum? – How have your prior personal beliefs and

experiences to date informed your perceptions?– What are pupils and public attitudes towards

your subject, and how does this differ from your own?

– What are the critical readings/ literature reviews that have informed your judgments at this stage, and why? Phil Duggan

6

Why a poster?

• Represents an attempt to broaden student experience of assessment and it adds interest– The academic poster format encourages a critical

evaluation and synthesis of varied material which is indicative of ‘M’ level work.

– The incorporation of the students own perceptions in correlation with the attitudes of other people adds an extra element of original work.

• Challenged our own knowledge• Why not?

Phil Duggan

What makes an ‘M’level poster?

In an ‘academic poster’ we are looking for– How well does the introduction establish the

importance of the topic and indicate which aspects of the topic are being addressed?

– Has sufficient evidence relating to the question been presented in the body of the poster?

– How well does this evidence relate to the most important aspects of the question and how well organised is it organised?

– How good is this evidence in terms of its source and its currency?

– To what extent is this evidence supported with appropriate in text references to the literature and how reasonable is the conclusion? Phil Duggan

7

What makes an ‘M’ level poster? (2)

– Overall, how well does the poster answer the question that was addressed?

– Is there a properly presented list of references used as sources of evidence?

– How appropriate is the amount of content presented in the poster and how well is it displayed?

• Guidance given to students as to what constituted an ‘academic’ poster

Phil Duggan

Assessment

• Students asked to present their poster for 5 minutes to their tutors (presentation not assessed)– Good opportunity for peer assessment– Good opportunity to explain the concepts behind their

poster– Good opportunity for staff to gauge the students

intentions

Phil Duggan

8

Finally: How well did it work?• Year 1: Assessment criteria ratified by a variety

of external examiners, but a variable output from students and varied interpretation of the assessment criteria by staff. Many students unaware of target audience.– Many staff reported feeling ‘outside their

comfort zone’ and were apprehensive about moderation

• Year 2: a higher standard of output from students and a much greater consensus as to the application of the assessment criteria by staff – Most staff now regard the poster as their

favourite part of the assessment schedule

Research project literature SearchAnd Methodology

Informs teaching staff of trainees

current issues/concerns

Peer review develops awareness of wider pedagogic

issues to peer

Provides an opportunity for analyse of a TLA issue

Trainees replicateswork they ask of pupils

Peer reviewgeneratesdiscussion

Develops Masterslevel academic skills

increasingconfidence

Deborah Pownall

9

Subjects selected this year

• EMA and its influence on achievement targets

• Differentiation • Use of ICT by staff• WBL – student

perceptions• EMAs affect on

training organisations

• Learning styles and teaching strategies

• Using ICT to check short term learning

• Effective use of Interactive White Boards

• Classroom Behaviour management

Deborah Pownall

Peer Review: “It’s just cheap teaching, isn’t it?”

10

Peer Review Sessions1. Student lead workshops (10th Oct)

2. Poster presentation (31st Oct)

3. LTA proposal (19th Feb)

4. Teaching practice files(30th March)

“The first session was a really good way to get to know each other and find out was everyone else can do.”

“The peer review sessions have been good, but it’s difficult to be critical - you don’t want to upset anyone.”

“I didn’t know what to look for or what to write, but it was helpful to see what other people think of your work.”

11

Refer to handout

“Very supportive and friendly atmosphere to present ideas. Interesting to gain insight into other areas of enquiry to raise awareness of our own teaching.”

12

“I found it useful to listen to people from similar research ideas. This helped evolve my own proposal and offered new questions.”

“[Being] allowed to present ideas and proposals to the group to gain feedback and receive ideas that may not have been previously considered.”

13

“Although I wasn’t looking forward to the presentation day, it proved to be really useful. It was great to hear all the other students’ ideas and plans, and to receive their individual feedback on issues.”

Peer review is successful when:

•there is a clear agenda for giving feedback to each other

•students understand what they have to gain from the process

•there is trust between the members of the group

•there is good time management

14

What we have learnt:•A framework for feedback gives ‘permission’ to critique the work of others

•Peer review develops a supportive critical community

•Students’ ability to reflect upon their own work is enhanced through peer review

S.hiett@ljmu.ac.uk