3. Points One to ThreeIntellectual Quality of the Learning Did the artefact stay focused on important ideas of the topic or subject?. Did it give students an opportunity to show their understanding of what is being taught?. Did it get students to think about different points of view, different ways to solve a problem, or different solutions to problems?. Energy Activity: 1)YESThe activity remained focused at all times about the topic 2)YES It gave students a chance to click and choose the power source that would have the least environmental impact 3)YES The interaction between choice and consequences of that decision meant they had to be careful about which power source to use. Human Body: 1) YES It does remain focused on the topic. 2)NO The Giggle factor of the content will distract the students 3)NO The limited actions in the presentation restricts the problem solving
4. Points Four to SixIntellectual quality of the Learning Did it create tasks/questions that require the students to organise, apply, analyse, create or evaluate the new knowledge of the lesson?. Did it get students to think and talk about language and how it works and how it can make their work or answers better?. Did it get students to participate in meaningful discussions with me and the other students about what they were learning?. Energy Activity: 4) YES The presentation has a graded score at each choice, so the students need to apply different techniques 5) NO The presentation was limited for this factor 6)YES At reflection time about the activity after it has finished. Human Body: 4)NOThere was no such feature in this presentation 5)NO Again limited interaction about this. 6) NO Its purely a simple limited non discussion presentation.
5. Points Seven to NineQuality of the Learning Environment Did It provide the quality of work that students needed to reach or modelled and explained what was required well?. Did it make sure that part of it was challenging or difficult for all the students enough to keep them interested?. Did it give students some say in the what the lesson was about or how it unfolded in real time in the classroom?. Energy Activity: 1) YES Very well presented and explained the topic in a simple meaningful way. 2) YES The thought process that the students have to apply will keep them interested. 3)YES As they got to choose which city to input into the presentation. Human Body: 1)NO The quality of the presentation was very low and non informative. 2)NO The simplicity was not at all suited to the growing minds of students. 3) NO Again the interaction between students and teacher would be a failure.
6. Points Ten to TwelveSignificance of the Learning Did it use Metacognition to demonstrate how to link what the students were learning with what they already know?. Did it make sure that it considered the cultural beliefs/views or knowledge of all students in the class ?. Did it use questions to guide students in linking the lesson/unit learning to other topics or subjects Energy Activity 1)YES the presentation would add to their already known factors of environmental issues. 2) YES The presentation was non religion biased. 3)NO the limitations of this were apparent in this presentation. Human Body: 1)NO The limited understanding of the human body and say puberty, would only confuse them about what they already know. 2)NO The demonstration was only limited to Caucasian students 3)NO There was no evidence of this feature at all.
7. Points Thirteen to FifteenSignificance of the Learning. Was it careful with questioning/setting up groups to make sure all students equally included in the lesson ?. Did it make sure that the lesson had a real world application or connection between what the students were learning and their future learning needs ?. Did it make sure that it built the field or context using stories that made the learning more meaningful or accessible for all students?. Energy Activity: 1)YES The activity was aimed at getting the students to compete. 2)YES The real world application only makes students even more aware about environmental issues and the effects of the future power needs. 3)YES the activity used context that could be understood by all age groups. Human Body: 1)YES I believe that all students would have participated in this activity only even if it was for a giggle or laugh...but not constructively. 2)NO the connection just was not there for future learning techniques. 3) NO the presentation lacked context and would not be meaningful to the students.
8. Conclusion: Thanks for listening to my presentation. Now for the vote about which presentation had the most impact and was most applicable to lesson content and context: The Energy Activity had 13 YES and 2 NO The Human Body had 13 NO and 2 YES.. Strong evidence of a good and bad presentation are clear in the results !!
