好品格、好情緒、好關係：三好教學機制 (Triple Good Instructional Settings)
若想進一步了解相關實作細節，可聯繫：
contact@gritlabtaiwan.com 或 gritlbataiwan@gmail.com(蔡惠文老師)
contact@gritlabtaiwan.com 或 gritlbataiwan@gmail.com(蔡惠文老師)
示範影片Demo Video
2018 APS Annual Convention Poster
三好教學機制 (Triple Good Instructional Settings) (or SAI, Tsai & Cheng, 2018)
是指在教學中聚焦「品格」、「關係」與「情緒」三面向的教學模式。教師善用心理發展特性，養成學生良好品格、人我關係及學習情緒，藉此引發學習動機，達成良好學習成效。
活動設計目標：學生熱烈參與班級課堂討論
適用課堂活動形式：分組合作學習
適用對象：青少年
活動進行方式：[方便起見，容我給個順口溜]
指定號碼1輪流答
不論對錯儘管答
計算次數2有賞罰3
積極投入笑哈哈4
*NOTES:
1. 老師以學期為單位進行3-4人的異質分組(依照特性與成績)，但學期間可依實際狀況進行滾動式調整，組內序號乃依據各組員班級號碼順序。老師在班級討論開始前指定各組的組別之星(STAR)，每組的那顆星都必須是該組第一個發言的，接續再按號碼輪流，例如，老師說：「今天的小組之星是2號」，討論開始後，每組2號要先代表發言，接續是3號、4號、1號。
2. 學生舉手後，被老師點到發言就算一次發言次數。每堂課下課前，老師請各組同學計算全組員於該堂課的發言總次數，並派一代表舉手示意次數。
3. 賞罰部分絕不涉及分數，僅為該堂課發言最少的一個組別要在下堂課唱一首英文歌曲，而歌詞需含括指定範圍內的一個生字。
例如：老師正在進行12課，該組學生要從該課的主要生字裡選定一字找歌曲，而該組同學唱歌時，其他同學須仔細聆聽以找出他們選定的關鍵字，無法聽到關鍵字者的組別會成為下堂課的唱歌組別的候選人(注意：老師隨機抽點三組同學回答，若都沒能給予正確解答，且老師也未能聽出的話，抽到三組與原唱歌組別便須各派一名代表進行猜拳；若老師能猜出，但抽到三組別為能猜出的話，則抽到三組別進行猜拳即可。此原則可促使唱歌組別同學較認真準備，也能促使其他同學專心聆聽)。一堂課以一組唱歌為原則(注意：組別號碼要記錄在黑板右上方以作為提醒)，若超過2組以上，請各組派代表進行猜拳，以猜贏的組別作為下堂課的唱歌組別。
例如：老師正在進行12課，該組學生要從該課的主要生字裡選定一字找歌曲，而該組同學唱歌時，其他同學須仔細聆聽以找出他們選定的關鍵字，無法聽到關鍵字者的組別會成為下堂課的唱歌組別的候選人(注意：老師隨機抽點三組同學回答，若都沒能給予正確解答，且老師也未能聽出的話，抽到三組與原唱歌組別便須各派一名代表進行猜拳；若老師能猜出，但抽到三組別為能猜出的話，則抽到三組別進行猜拳即可。此原則可促使唱歌組別同學較認真準備，也能促使其他同學專心聆聽)。一堂課以一組唱歌為原則(注意：組別號碼要記錄在黑板右上方以作為提醒)，若超過2組以上，請各組派代表進行猜拳，以猜贏的組別作為下堂課的唱歌組別。
4. 小組坐一起，並先完成小組討論後進行，該活動成效最佳。
**本文末有教學法引用出處與2018年於 The 30th APS Annual Convention的摘要。
若想進一步了解相關實作細節，可聯繫：
contact@gritlabtaiwan.com 或 gritlbataiwan@gmail.com(蔡惠文老師)
**本文末有教學法引用出處與2018年於 The 30th APS Annual Convention的摘要。
Citation:
Tsai, H. W. and Cheng, C. L. (2018). Peer pressure as a motivational enabler for adolescents' class participation: A preliminary investigation on Social Aspiration-Driven Instruction. Poster session presented at: The 30th APS Annual Convention; 2018 May 24-27; San Francisco, CA, USA
The instruction is embedded in the cooperative learning approach, implemented especially in a whole class discussion after a small group discussion. The steps to take are as follows:
(1) Students work in heterogeneous groups of 3-4.
(2) One student in each group would be designated by the teacher as "the star of the group" (hereafter this text will be abbreviated as Star). The Star needs to be the first to talk for their group in class discussions by raising their hands. Then, the rest of the group members take turns by the order of their student numbers. (a)
(3) Students put up their hands gesturing their group total counts of the oral participation by the end of the class;
(4) Whichever group has the fewest counts in that class will sing a song in the next class. (b)
Notes:
(a) Students raising hands and then being called upon by the teacher counts 1 time of class participation (i.e., 1 count), regardless of a right or wrong answer being given (i.e., No-wrong-answer policy).
(b) Singing a song is conceptualized as a "punishment" in class and an ultimate goal for each group to "avoid"(i.e., The other side of the coin is the participation count, that is, the ultimate goal for each group to achieve. Concerning the designed goal, whether singing should be taken as a "punishment" or a "reward" or whether adopting a reward rather than a punishment in the strategy may require further studies). Take my class as an example. The losing team will be asked to find an English song with (at least) one key vocabulary word being learned in the lyrics. When the team sing the song in the next class, the rest of the class need to find out which word it is. If failing to answer, whichever group is being called to answer will sing another song the next time instead. Besides, to save time, no more than one group sings in one class period. Therefore, if there are more than 2 losing teams, they will play the finger-guessing game (i.e., Rock-Scissors-Paper) and the "winner" of the game will be "punished" by singing in the next class.
Note: SAI is revised as TSAI, or Toward Social Aspirations Instruction.
(a) Students raising hands and then being called upon by the teacher counts 1 time of class participation (i.e., 1 count), regardless of a right or wrong answer being given (i.e., No-wrong-answer policy).
(b) Singing a song is conceptualized as a "punishment" in class and an ultimate goal for each group to "avoid"(i.e., The other side of the coin is the participation count, that is, the ultimate goal for each group to achieve. Concerning the designed goal, whether singing should be taken as a "punishment" or a "reward" or whether adopting a reward rather than a punishment in the strategy may require further studies). Take my class as an example. The losing team will be asked to find an English song with (at least) one key vocabulary word being learned in the lyrics. When the team sing the song in the next class, the rest of the class need to find out which word it is. If failing to answer, whichever group is being called to answer will sing another song the next time instead. Besides, to save time, no more than one group sings in one class period. Therefore, if there are more than 2 losing teams, they will play the finger-guessing game (i.e., Rock-Scissors-Paper) and the "winner" of the game will be "punished" by singing in the next class.
Note: SAI is revised as TSAI, or Toward Social Aspirations Instruction.
Abstract
Class participation puts students in "favorable position" in learning. However, East Asian students have been alleged to be passive learners in oral participation in class discussions (e.g., Beekes, 2006). While the causes to the reticence are in debate, it is unanimously suggested that teachers aim to create an inviting class climate with effective instructions to promote class participation and hence the learning (O'Connor, 2013). Adolescence is a time of drastic transitions in neuronal processes, environments, and relations (Nelson et al., 2005). Neurobiologically, adolescents are distinct in their exaggerated ventral striatum response to the rewarding experiences of peer interactions (Blackmore & Mills, 2014). Furthermore, as adolescents spend more time with peers, peer evaluations and acceptance are exerting a growing impact on self-worth, learning engagement and academic achievement (Martin & Dawson, 2009). Existing research takes relatively little interest in high school students' performance in class discussions. Furthermore, the known techniques that address students' reticence in class discussions are not without problems. Accordingly, this study proposed the Social Aspiration-driven Instruction (SAI) and evaluated its effect by examining the relationships between students' perceived peer pressure and engagement in class oral participation. SAI is theoretically framed by social interdependence theory (Johnson & Johnson, 1989) and social goal theory in academics (Urdan & Maehr, 1995), with a further focus on the issue of shame (Lashbrook, 2000). Underscoring teens' susceptibility to peer relationships, the positive social-interdependence salient conditions of SAI orient learners to the social goals of peer evaluations, acceptance and likeability while attenuating students' concerns about shaming themselves. Participants comprised 117 female 11th graders from one public high school in Taiwan. They were frequently situated in SAI in their English language classes throughout a semester (a total of 20 weeks and 5 class periods of 50 minutes a week). The instructor conducted SAI as following procedures: (1) Students work in heterogeneous groups of 3-4; (2) One student in each group is designated as Star, who is required to be the first to talk for their group in class discussions. Raising hands and being called is one participation count and no-wrong-answer policy is adopted; (3) The other group members take turns contributing to participation counts in class discussions; and (4) The group has the fewest counts receives rewards/punishments. At the end of semester, the participants completed 2 questionnaires on a 4-point Likert-type scale: a 6-item Peer Pressure Questionnaire (α = .85) and a 24-item Engagement in Class Discussions Scale (α = .91; Skinner et al., 2009). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .76 and .87, above the recommended value of .6, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were both significant. The results indicated that the perceived peer pressure and engagement in class discussions are moderately correlated (r = .39***). SAI is handy enough for teachers to implement in their classrooms and, most importantly, it is specifically tailored to adolescents' developmental characteristics. Further research needed, this preliminary study showed that adolescents' propensity to peer relationships, if employed properly, bears great potential to enhance students' engagement in class discussions.
Comments
Post a Comment