This post was originally published on the FASoS Teaching & Learning Blog on 5 February 2019 and was co-authored with Afke Groen. It has been a year since we started our Teaching & Learning Blog! And what better way to celebrate than with a blog of our own about the importance of sharing teaching experiences and best practices.
Over the past year, through our blog, we for example learned that a good supervisor offers reassurance, a good tutor realises that she is not omnipotent, and a good mentor does not wait for students to come to himbut acts when he signals something. Two contributions also stressed the relation between Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and academic writing: both in terms of the latter as a tool to support the former, and the former as a tool to support the latter. And while some argued that PBL is more relevant than everin times of complex problems, others noted that some of PBL’s core ideas are under pressure. A big thank you to all of those making these contributions! And a big thank you also to those reading these blog contributions. Because indeed it is not just sharingexperiences that we want to stimulate, but also listeningto them and reading about them. This is rooted in our belief that becoming better teachers at university requires us to talk to each other about our teaching; about our experiences with teaching and our different approaches to it. Afke, for instance, has started to use the whiteboard to take note of students’ doubts and unanswered questions after Sven Schaepkens and Patrick’s blog about whiteboarding. And after Michael Shackleton’s blog about the expert lecture, she has become even more aware that a good lecturer does not explain concepts to students, but illustrates them with the dilemmas and experiences of researchers and practitioners. Patrick has become more sensitive towards the diversity of students and staff and the challenges they encounter. He has made changes to the courses that he coordinates, for instance through updating assignment texts to generate more discussion (keep an eye on the upcoming contribution by Sven Schaepkens about problem design in the humanities and social sciences). He has also invited some of our contributors to share more of their invaluable experience with colleagues in the University Teaching Qualification (UTQ) trajectory. Of course, we hope that more people will contribute to and read our blog over the next year. Not just to further the debate about teaching and learning and learn from each other, but also because there are some policy changes on the agenda that we need to discuss – and in light of which we need to discuss our teaching practices. At the national level, there are discussions on how to value good teaching in academia more prominently than is the case now. Such debates about the desirability of teaching careers in higher education are also increasingly relevant outside of the Netherlands. In addition, as of September 2019 Maastricht University will launch the Continuous Professional Development programme, which will require all UTQ-certified teaching staff to continue their development as teachers. Finally, a university-level steering group currently discusses the university’s third main research theme, Learning & Innovation, in which research into teaching will play an important role. A conference dedicated to this theme will take place on 12 June this year. As such, there are many developments that will impact on teaching and learning at this faculty. Yet, while there are all sorts of workshops, books, articles and blogs about improving your research, academics seem much less accustomed to learning about teaching. All the more reason to continue with the FASoS Teaching & Learning Blog. And we have a couple of blogs in the pipeline already, on topics such as:
If you want join the debate, please do not hesitate to contact us with your idea for a blog. You can find the requirements on our website. You can also simply react to existing blogs by leaving a comment below the blog. We look forward to hearing from you!
2 Comments
This blog was originally published by Active Learning in Political Science on 20 November 2018. During last September’s annual conference of the University Association for Contemporary European Studies (UACES) in Bath, Simon kicked off the teaching and learning afternoon gathering with a teaching and learning bingo. I enjoyed this a lot. It was nice, active, fun. I got to meet new people and learned new thing about teaching and learning. Based on this (perhaps somewhat subjective) experience, I decided to hijack Simon’s idea and use it in two similar, but different settings. This is what happened. Problem-Based Learning workshop Bolzano Maastricht University is known for its application of Problem-Based Learning (PBL). New staff have to attend a PBL introduction training session upon starting at our university. All teaching staff also need to complete the so-called University Teaching Qualification (UTQ) trajectory (this, in fact, applies to all higher education institutions in the Netherlands). One of my duties is to coordinate UTQ at my home faculty. And it was this – plus my teaching experience – that lead me to being invited to convene a workshop entitled ‘Tutors in problem-based learning from distant facilitator to approachable coach’ at the University of Bolzano early October. Since I did not know any of the people there, I thought this would be a great opportunity to use the T&L bingo. I adapted Simon’s bingo to my own needs. The instructions are relatively straightforward and the items of a diverse nature, including more light-hearted ones. It worked surprisingly well. I got to know the participants, plus they got to know each other a bit better too. It also provided me with some input for the workshop (‘The one thing they’re hoping to learn more about today’). Considering it was a day-long workshop, this helped me to focus on specific points and also, towards the end, to check if everyone thought that we sufficiently covered their needs. University Teaching Qualification workshop Maastricht I already wrote that I coordinate UTQ at my home faculty. This year 13 colleagues have to complete the trajectory. The group of participants is very diverse in terms of disciplinary backgrounds and teaching experience, and included teaching assistants, PhD students and a professor. Not everyone knew each other, so once again the bingo seemed like a good idea. And once again, I thought I could use the input for the workshop.
This time too, I adapted the bingo to the setting,with specific questions about the topics that we were going to focus on during the day. Even though there was some hilarity as to whether this was really a serious exercise (see this tweet),participants actively engaged in it. As they will be working together throughout this academic year, it was important that they got to know each other – the usual round of introduction is a bit boring, especially because it usually does not result in new information. Once more I included a question that gave me specific input as to the expectations for the day (‘Your colleague’s personal learning goal for today’). What I learned The good: after a bit of hesitation everyone got really involved. Some colleagues did their utmost best to talk to everyone; others decided for a longer talk when the issue at hand was interesting. Reason enough to do it again, though I’d probably want to explain the exercise better in order to avoid awkward moments at the start. The bad: timing is an issue. In both cases, we took much more time than I had anticipated, as everyone really got into it and because I had encouraged them to try and talk to everyone. Next time I might consider using a timer or buzzer. Or perhaps offer a prize to the person who gets most boxes filled within a set time. The ugly: I enjoyed it so much that I also got completely carried away. And subsequently lost track of time… As such, a timer is definitely needed! Someone needs to keep track of me too. I might ask one of the other participants to be in charge of time instead. What’s next I’d love to try this exercise with students. I think it would make a great course opening. I mostly teach in a programme with +300 students, so they do not always know each other despite changing tutor groups every 8 weeks and every course. Plus it would be a great way to have them discuss a course topic in a more informal setting and get to know more about the course’s intended learning outcomes. Obviously, I would have to adapt the bingo to the course itself. I would include a debriefing so that we all get to know more about students’ pre-knowledge about the topic and our expectations of the course, the group and the tutor (i.e. me). And, you know; I already have a course in mind. This blog originally appeared in the April 2018 issue of student magazine Mosaïek, which was fully dedicated to research and writing. The current version was adapted for online publication and can also be read on the FASoS Teaching & Learning Blog. “Learning how to do research is one of the most important tasks at the university. It is also one of the most challenging.” (Murtonen & Lehtinen, ‘Learning to be a researcher’, in Academic research and researchers) Academic research and writing are at the core of university studies. Luckily, whether you are a BA student writing you first research paper or a PhD student working on your dissertation, there is a whole world out there full of articles, blogs and books with hands-on advice. For instance, a few years ago, university newspaper Observant published a great piece with ten tips for writing your BA or MA thesis. Likewise, Gerald Schneider provides advice on “how to avoid the seven deadly sins of academic writing”. And many of you will have encountered The Craft of Research during your studies at our faculty. No doubt, your tutors and supervisor usually also bombard you with all kinds of advice. Here, I would like to highlight four underestimated ways to become a better academic writer.
1. Read a lot Yes, surprise: reading is key to research and writing. You need to embed your work in a broader literature. Have other scholars written about similar topics? How do you position yourself vis-à-vis their work? What contribution does your work make? But reading also helps to get a better insight into structure and vocabulary used in the field. Reading inspires (I wish my contribution to this issue of Mosaïek was as elegant and erudite as John Harbord’s!). By reading other people’s work – academic, but also non-academic work, including blogs, novels and poetry – you also get a feel of what writing you like and how you can use it to develop your own style. 2. Cherish feedback opportunities This may sound obvious to you, but is it really? In a course that I taught recently, of the 14 students whose paper I failed, only 2 attended my feedback open office hours. Colleagues had a similar experience, hence it came as no surprise that 50% did not pass the resit. Seeking or creating feedback opportunities is key to academic research and writing. This is why your tutors and supervisors present their work at conferences. Note that feedback is not only useful when you fail, but also when you pass. As you progress through your studies, expectations increase. For instance, did you know that students sometimes fail their thesis, simply because they assume that it is just another paper? 3. Use formal requirements to your advantage Like you, I too regularly get stuck when working on my research. When I do, I do not just lie back and wait for some magic to happen. Instead, I check the formal requirements of the publisher or journal that I would like to publish my research with. When applying these requirements to my text, I often bump into mistakes or incomprehensible writing, simply because I look at the text from a different perspective. So, while APA may be a pain, use it to your advantage – and mind you: when we try to publish, we nearly always encounter different requirements, so you should actually consider yourself lucky to just have to work with APA. 4. Use PBL to the fullest I see you wondering: “What does PBL have to do with research and writing?” Well, PBL is all about research! Those annoying 7 steps actually replicate common steps of a research process: you start with a puzzle, determine what you know and what you do not know about the topic, and develop one or more research questions to guide your research. Studying different sources will help you to answer those questions and come to a conclusion. I know that this research process is not always replicated in every course – in fact, scholars have referred to an “erosion” of PBL. But you play a role in this yourself by following those steps and by asking your tutors to do so as well. To round off, you may think that this is all very useful for all the academic papers that we have you write at FASoS, but other than that, why should you bother? Well, did you know that most FASoS alumni end up in jobs where they have to judge existing research and need to engage in research and writing themselves? It is likely that you end up writing reports for art institutions, governmental bodies or companies (e.g. ). Or maybe you become a journalist, like former Arts and Culture student Marcia Luyten and former European Studies student Melle Garschagen. So, keep on practicing your research and writing skills! This blog is co-authored with Afke Groen and was originally published by Active Learning in Political Science on 20 September 2018. We have been following the ALPS-blog discussion on students’ participation between Amanda and Simon with great interest. The situations they discuss are very familiar.
In Maastricht, learning takes place according to the principles of problem-based learning (PBL); through active participation and discussions in tutorials. In the programmes that we teach in, we can grade students’ participation with a +0.5 on top of the exam grade for exceptionally good participation or a -0.5 for insufficient participation – a system introduced following discussions about the problem of ‘free-riders’. We too see students who remain silent. We train students, encourage participation and discuss group dynamics, but students may not feel comfortable or skilled to live up to our expectations – certainly not in their first weeks at university. Indeed, in the discussion between Simon and Amanda, the “problem” seems to be students who do not talk. Teaching is about “getting students to talk” and about “[getting] them to a point where they do the readings and are willing and able to talk about them”. But to what extent is not talking a problem? Why doesn’t a student talk? And if it’s a problem, who’s problem is it? The emphasis on active participation actually represents a new way of thinking about student learning, one that may even be alien to some students. As Louisa Remedios, David Clarke and Lesleyanne Hawthorneexplain, “[t]here has been a recent shift of instructional paradigm from valuing and encouraging students to be silent so as to actively listen and learn from a more knowledgeable other (teacher), to becoming knowledgeable by speaking and elaborating on content knowledge.” The value of silence In our experience, most students who don’t talk, aren’t actually ‘free-riding’. They prepare for tutorials, have extensive notes and are clearly paying attention to what’s being discussed. In addition, PBL extends beyond the classroom, with some students feeling much more comfortable to discuss readings with fellow students when preparing for tutorials. We also witness various productive forms of “silence”. Just like Jun Jin, we see that silence is used to look at notes, think about what has been said and recall prior knowledge. As such, silence may be positive for knowledge construction and group learning. Moreover, a silent student may also be a student who is good at (active!) listening: it often requires silence to understand group discussions and dynamics. We can also strategically use silence as teachers – beyond increasing “wait time” to get someone to fill an awkward silence. Sure, there are problematic cases of silence. The ‘free-rider’ tends to be easily recognisable: she or he comes to class unprepared, does not contribute to discussions or does so in a non-productive way. Yet, other students feel scared, shy or uncomfortable to contribute to classroom discussions. So how can we tell the difference between these students and those who are ‘productively’ silent? Research shows that tutors in PBL have a good insight into students’ chances of becoming successful in their studies. We can act based on these insights. Observing silent students and talking to them is important; putting pressure on them surely will not help. Instead, a tutor’s role is to facilitate group learning and coach students to become better learners. As Simon writes: “[we] might not be at the centre of the classroom, but that doesn’t mean [we] don’t shape, contribute, encourage and support.” In short, students’ silence is not always a problem. Instead, we should appreciate silence as an inherent element in learning and find other ways in which to coach silent learners without identifying by default them as problematic learners or even ‘free-riders’. This post was originally published by the FASoS Teaching & Learning Blog on 30 May 2018. Co-authored with Mirko Reithler. Problem-based learning (PBL) is at the heart of teaching at Maastricht University and at the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASoS). It is a student-centred approach to learning: students encounter problems that contextualise a learning process that emphasises the importance of self-directed, collaborative and constructive learning. But there is theory and there is practice. 12 years ago, Jos Moust, Henk van Berkel and Henk Schmidt published an article entitled ‘Signs of erosion: Reflections on three decades of problem-based learning at Maastricht University’. They give an excellent overview of the original premises of PBL, but also of the challenges to implement PBL. Last year, these challenges were discussed in university newspaper Observant, with interviews with Henk Schmidt (a key figure in the development of PBL in Maastricht and beyond and a guest at our faculty two years ago), Virginie Servant (a researcher at Rotterdam University) and Walter Jansen (from EdLab, the university’s education lab).
Why is this discussion important? Simple: Maastricht University prides itself on using PBL, yet at the same time many of the core ideas of this approach to teaching and learning have come under pressure. We have both been involved in several PBL-related initiatives, from the Leading in Learning project ‘Updating PBL at FASoS’ to the EdLab project on PBL and research skills, and of course the University Teaching Qualification. Based on our experience, and taking into account the aforementioned article, we believe that there are at least three key PBL challenges that we should discuss at FASoS:
These are just three points that we feel that should and can be tackled. We would like to start this discussion by inviting you to join in. Do you agree with our diagnosis? Maybe you have some solutions to offer? Or maybe you have additional points that you would like to address? So, react to this blog, by commenting below or by drafting your own post. This post was originally published on the FASoS Teaching & Learning Blog on 19 March 2018. Co-authored with colleague Sven Schaepkens. FASoS teaching staff sometimes informally meet to share experience. One such event took place on 7 November 2017. A group of new and experienced staff watched the UM DVD Problem based learning: Tips from experienced tutors, as well as the (in)famous FASoS PBL video. There is a lot going on in the latter that defies what PBL should be like, but there were some surprised faces when the following was raised.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sven (S): I’m surprised to see that the whiteboard is used during the post-discussion. This must be an exceptional case. Isn’t the whiteboard primarily a tool for the pre-discussion? Patrick (P): You don’t use the whiteboard during the post-discussion? S: I believe that the ideal moment to use the whiteboard is during pre-discussions, because the post-discussion facilitates something else. As a philosophy teacher, I have become acquainted with the Socratic method, which, in my view, aligns well with the spirit of PBL, especially during the post-discussion. The Socratic method assumes that groups acquire a shared understanding of an issue by repeating and summarising each other’s answers. The group members calibrate their understanding by letting various comments circulate in this ‘echo chamber’ and by asking additional questions aimed at clarification. P: I too encourage students to keep on asking and answering questions to further their learning. Yet, I want them to keep track of their discussions on the whiteboard, so that we can go back to points raised before. Why does the Socratic method exclude the use of the whiteboard? S: Don’t get me wrong: good whiteboarding is helpful to structure a brainstorm, and students are truly capable of effective whiteboard use. They support the discussion by making schemes, drawing time lines, grouping certain concepts together, and highlighting relations and similarities. When all of the above more or less happens, I´m a happy tutor! P: That’s indeed what good whiteboarding is about. But even the far from ideal jotting down of terms serves as a – very basic – means of support for the group process. Why can’t this be supportive to the post-discussion too? S: Generally, whiteboarding stalls the PBL process. Where the Socratic dialogue has an inherently open nature, students in tutorials seem to desire closure: “Did we answer the learning objective? What am I supposed to know for the exam?” They use the whiteboard for attaining closure. What’s on the whiteboard is the ‘the proper answer’, and we can all stop talking, cease thinking, and move to the next learning goal. P: I have experienced this too. That’s why I encourage discussion leaders to keep on asking questions; why I keep on asking questions. But having those concepts on the whiteboard also allows us to draw links between them and, quite often, address contradictions. Without the whiteboard students may do so in their own notes, but then the closure happens there. I’d rather have them focus on the discussion than on their notes. I believe that the use of the whiteboard allows this and, hence, actually fosters openness. S: I don’t think that students attain closure through their own notes when they don’t use the whiteboard. The individual notes can be a form of personal closure, but that’s different from mutual understanding at group level. The notes on the whiteboard are there for all to see and latch onto, whereas personal notes that aim at closure need to be verbalised in the group´s echo chamber. This verbal exercise moving from private to group closure is for me the goal in post-discussions. P: During EU Politics I regularly take my groups outside, the weather generally being really nice during period 5. They always struggle without the whiteboard. This applies to all group members, including the person who takes notes to share through the electronic learning environment. They still focus on the ‘right’ answer and even more do than before. S: But this observation supports my intuition: Careful listening by summarising and asking questions is not practiced enough! The whiteboard is perceived as a safety net. Will a group member engage in the same way when things will eventually appear on the whiteboard, opposed to the situation where it all depends on one’s own listening and verbalisation skills? P: I don’t agree that the whiteboard is just a safety net. Instead, I agree with Terry Barrett and Sarah Moore, who, in a chapter in an interesting volume on PBL, argue that using the whiteboard is key in shaping the “shared learning environment” required to foster “dialogic knowledge”. (…) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We still haven’t reached a conclusion… But maybe you can help? Please let us know your thoughts by dropping your comments below! There is also the big elephant in the room: maybe the general erosion of PBL needs to be addressed, rather than whether or not to use the whiteboard? This post was originally published by CERiM on 8 December 2016 Brexit, the Eurozone and refugee crises, and increased criticism on globalisation have shed doubts about the future of European integration. This certainly isn’t the first time that the European Union (EU) is going through a crisis, nor is it the first time that European integration is questioned. But, this mood seems to be more acute than ever before. This also presents challenges for teaching European Studies.
The rationale for studying European Studies The livelihood of any programme in higher education depends on its ability to attract new students. Yet, recently current and prospective students have been asking questions about the need to continue studying Europe. For instance, during Politico’s Harry Cooper’s recent Jean Monnet Lecture on 13 October 2016, an audience member asked whether he had made a good choice by opting for our BA in European Studies. I don’t think that a total collapse of the EU is very likely. The EU – including all its pros and cons – has become an integral part of political and even public life in Europe. Criticism of the EU tends to be equated to being anti-EU, yet often doesn’t concern its existence as such, but rather what it does (and doesn’t!) do. Several post-Brexit polls have actually shown that support for the EU has increased since. European Studies transcends disciplinary boundaries, helping us to better understand contemporary developments such as Brexit. It does so in an international context, with the majority of students and staff being non-Dutch, thus allowing for different national perspectives to be brought in. Perhaps even more importantly, students acquire knowledge and skills that allow them to continue studying in a variety of fields – in fact, many do and most of our alumni actually don’t end up working in Brussels. Keeping European Studies up-to-date The fact that there are more generic reasons why studying European Studies still makes sense, doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t adapt our programmes to take into account the ever-changing context in which we teach. Having been programme director myself, I know that keeping programmes up-to-date is time consuming and challenging, having to take into account final qualifications, teaching and exam regulation, etc. But, there are other ways in which we can address the contemporary issues that students want to learn about and discuss. First, Maastricht University prides itself on its use of Problem-Based Learning (PBL). In its purest sense, PBL assumes that we don’t provide students with reading lists, but that they search for literature themselves, based on gaps in their knowledge. Even when literature is given, PBL allows for critical discussions that extend beyond that literature. So, when applied properly, PBL offers many opportunities to bring in contemporary developments. A second way in which we can address the need to adapt to contemporary developments, is by stressing extra-curricular events that can help to establish a link between what we teach and the everyday reality of Europe. Within Maastricht, this includes the events organised by CERiM, which have focussed on all kinds of contemporary issues, but also lectures and debates organised by Studium Generale or the city and province. What’s next? European Studies student Kerstin Spath recently wrote in the university newspaper Observant that “the EU offers us so much. So why can’t it just stay like that?” The EU will, of course, change post-Brexit (as international students in the UK are already experiencing), but it is also likely to stay. And if it doesn’t we could always consider changing to European Disintegration Studies, in which we will address the question “what on earth went wrong with the EU?”! A few years ago Strut Records issued a great series of records, called Inspiration Information. It featured a number of experimental collaborations between, for instance, Lloyd Miller & The Heliocentrics and Jimi Tenor & Tony Allen. You should definitely check those records out, yet I am not going to review them for you here. However, I recently had to think of this series. A few weeks ago the programme directors of the BA ES, Esther Versluis and Arjan Schakel, asked me whether I would be willing to do an 'inspiring' and 'informative' (yes) Problem-Based Learning (PBL) simulation during Maastricht University's BA Open Day on 12 November. I more or less said 'yes' straightaway - they are very persuasive - despite not really knowing what was expected from me. I knew that the current video on our website only shows part of what PBL actually entails. Beyond that, I was told that I could put forward a list of current 1st and 2nd year students whom I would like to do the simulation with. Additional information on what was expected from the students and me came just a few days before the 12th: a short presentation and a simulation of a group meeting. In 30 minutes... Maastricht University prides itself on its use of PBL, but it is something very difficult to simulate in an inspiring and informative way in 30 minutes. Tutorials usually last about two hours, based on the so-called seven jump that actually extends from one session to the next. Preparation also entails quite a lot of reading, depending on the assignment. This is where another one of the aforementioned words came in, namely 'experimental'. I sat down for a drink and a discussion with Arjan and we eventually devised a number of basic background slides, as well as four slides with an actual BA ES assignment that would be used to simulate four PBL situations:
This may all sound very organised, but the experiment continued as the seven students that were going to help me out - Astrid, Elisa, Jeanine, Justine, Lukas, Nicole and Sophie - only found out what we are going to do on the day itself. But guess what? They did an excellent job! And while some tweaking is still needed, the three sessions were considered inspirational and informative and prospective students and their parents asked very relevant questions. To come back to Strut Record's series; an experimental setting can stimulate inspirational and informative collaboration. Something that we too often tend to forget; something that we may want to cultivate more in our teaching. In fact, Astrid, Elisa, Jeanine, Justine, Lukas, Nicole and Sophie did so well that we even nearly became trending topic on twitter! Nearly.
If you are interested in finding out more about PBL in European Studies, check out this chapter by my colleagues Heidi Maurer and Christine Neuhold: Maurer, H., & Neuhold, C. (2014). Problem-based learning in European Studies. In S. Baroncelli, R. Farneti, I. Horga & S. Vanhoonacker (Eds.), Teaching and learning the European Union. Traditional and innovative methods (pp. 199-215). Dordrecht: Springer. |
Archives
December 2023
Categories
All
|