---
# System prepended metadata

title: Fall 2021 MSTU4052 Midterm Feedback
tags: [' feedback', mstu4052]

---

---
tags: mstu4052, feedback
---

# Fall 2021 MSTU4052 Midterm Feedback

## List of Projects

- https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1u1zCt3XvngW---vSFxHA3ahrGgU5czHEh724rLg7KZg/edit#slide=id.p
- https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1EHux88YgHnjFHgeF6XANUpsTypE4hdxYCJhx69eDw_0/edit
- https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RbV0JwkIKRd51FMSe3ulSRME-ACxx5k0Hno2fjPKCxE/edit#slide=id.g35f391192_04
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ich5K_gqss



## Overarching Thoughts

Across the board I'm really pleased with how you'all are connecting the dots between real-life phenomenon, learners, and learning.

- You all clearly understand the spirit of the framework and what constitutes the soul of each phase. Remember, in realilty you don't have to use all five from the start. You might start by utilizing the concepts from Performances of Understanding because that's what your situation allows. Then go back to refine your understanding goals and assessments. Then iterate again by redesigning it under a good gen topic. I think, this is the value of this framework. It works as a whole - but the takeaway from me is how each of these stages are characterized and the relationships between that make our larger endeavors cohesive.
- I particularly liked the moments of specificity in your talks. Whether that's specificity of the domain concerns, or illustrative specificity through examples of what students would say, or do, or how they'd go about things. Examples, specificity - is persuasive - and helps listeners understand what you mean.
- You're all being very thoughtful of your performances so that they go beyond tasks and get into the thinking. There are moments here and there where I think we're still making assumptions learners will think in certain way when I think it's possible they might not, but I can clearly see you aren't being arbitrary and that you have reasons to believe it will be "minds on" and I think that's important. Understanding what minds-on is and looks like, hears like, feels like, does like - is something you continually develop as a teacher and designer... through actually RUNNING the design and observing how your learners behave.
- Like I mentioned before, understanding goals can be tricky particularly if you have little domain expertise in the area you're designing for. But what I appreciated is based on your declarations, you all have a consistency in latter portions of your design and how it supports the goals.

I think we're in a good position right now to switch gears - and start thinking about problems specifically. As we explore types of problems, characteristics of, what cognitive opportunities certain problems afford... what we can do is think about how to design such problems WITH supports - that FIT into a larger meaningful learning experience. And as we do so, think about "What does it mean to use technology in the context of supporting problem-solving >>> consequently, meaningful learning?"

---

## Zahar, Thomonique, Yuxin, Zhuoda

Generative Topic: Inquiries examples are interesting - by people's understanding "levels".

Understanding Goals: I'm not sure why people list:

- Analytical Skills
- Critical Thinking Skills

as understanding goals. These are general skills that are required of any subject. What would be more helpful are how domain specific contexts present specific types of analytical skills or critical thinking skills.

What does it mean to "process information in social media?" Is it to be able to look for specific kinds of features of social media? Understand genres of? Utilize certain theories?

Are there any specific tools taught to assess risk? E.g. SWOT analysis is a specific technique used to analyze risk.

Performances: Interesting. So here - you say learners should look at social media and determine WHAT kind of analyses have been done by the authors. In order to do this, this implies there are specific analyses they need to know and infer the use of. Thus, why not list under understanding goals - these specific analytical tool concepts?

Likewise in your culminating performance learners must do a bunch of things much more specific than critical thinking - they need to understand very specific domain concepts of how to conduct financial analyses (which I am not an expert in - I just know it's more specific than "critical thinking"), how to structure financial reports, understand different kinds of data, etc.

"One of three stock analyses approaches" - what are they!?

Guided performance activity - I can see this as scaffolded but in what ways are they guided? (Okay, later you mention this a bit - teachers guiding discussion on how and why they reach decisions. Guidance on reasoning.)

"Various evaluation techniques" - what are they?

Okay, in your assessment you list types of analyses. Fundamental, technical. It would help to bring some of this to light in your understanding goals.

"Connecting current financial performances to larger market forces." --- THIS is very interesting and a good pick for what you think might be most challenging. What DOES a superficial performance here look like? Or a great performance?

Black-swan events. This might be another important concept to build out your understanding goals.

Reflections / Community - okay. Seems in line with the theme and also development of selves.

TECH question - Use MS Excel. In what way would you have them use excel? And in what way would this way of using it - activate specific kinds of thinking around some of the things we mentioned prior?

---

## Tianyi, Tiansong, Xin

Gen Topic - overall I think it hits a meaningful spot. For your inquiry questions part - might help to include EXAMPLES of possible inquiries you hope students might ask.

Understanding Goals: Clear what important concepts are and the the details in slide help me understand what needs to be performed later. I can see the tie in of how the gen topic might provide opportunities to practice these concepts and make meaning out of it.

Performances: I think the idea to analyze one's own meals is a meaningful endeavor and a good way to utilize some of the concepts listed in your goals.

Might not be a bad idea to reference what/how your performance supports what/which understanding goal how.

Knowledge-map: interesting use of technology. What are the kinds of things they map and what do the connections between these things represent? How does this tie to building understanding (about what) or activate specific (what) kind of learning?

Love the EXAMPLES of what a performance would look like.

These performances touch on nice aspects of meaningfulness, authenticness, and I can see the alignment.

Assessment: Okay, pretty clear what the criteria and how it meets some of the goals you list. Painting picture of what failure on X goals look like is an indicator of thought and understanding of the purpose.

Reflective Communities: Reflection on changes of thinking, products that represent are nice supports to get people to think specifically about their processes.

Technology Tools: Sure, Google sheets, drawings, search, etc. But HOW is the usage designed that specifically makes people think? Tools for task vs tools to learn... ?

---

## Zexin, Khye, Tiger, Qi

Gen Topic: Appropraite and connected to the lived, shared experience of the student/community.

I think the cross section of understanding human experience and expressions of is a good intersection domain wise with many possibilities as entry points indicate.

Inquiry samples are interesting and as mentioned in class - I think some of this area lends will to the method you use of having people have to teach these things (or create products for) in order to learn themselves.

Understanding Goals: More or less I think I understand the goals / concepts and what specific aspect you're focusing on here and as mentioned - I think these two goals are highly intersect-able if that's a word.

Interesting performance 1. Like mentioned, I think the production of a creative artifact that requires 1) teaching children through story puts learners in an interesting position to have to understand the concepts and ... well - empathize. 2) it's related to the goals you mention from the english side of constructing verbal expressions at targetted audiences. However, I wonder if there is an opportunity lost here. Your goals specify writing for formal contexts and focus on rhetorical devices for persuasion. These are things that I don't think are necessarily a focus of children's books - but is there a way to negotiate this? I like the idea of making children books and see opportunities for how it might help with the other side. Do you?

For things like the OUTLINE - what does the actual outline look like? Demonstrating that will help me understand what you are focusing on here in terms of how you want people to think. That said, some of your success criteria you articulate gives a good sense of what that might look like.

Lastly, like I mentioned - the idea of a community generated rubric is an interesting one particularly for this topic area. I think having to generate a rubric is in many ways organizing and articulating what is important (values) which seems hand in hand with the kind of thing you're trying to get people to learn about.

Technologies: Think not what technologies but HOW technologies.

---

## Iman, Polly, Ryan, Titus

Generative Topic: It's a nice generative topic that I think emphasizes how "seemingly" disparate subject matter authentically comes together to affect our society.

For some of your slides - the ones with organizing diagrams and process summaries - I like the way you use it to help viewers understand your argument and narrative, but that you don't just read what's there - you elaborate on it.

Your examples of things like how students engage, or inquiries they migh ask help illustrate what you mean and how you see this.

I think the kinds of ways you're thinking about implementing activites that strike the themes of meaningfulness are nice. For example, starting with how these concepts relate to people personally grounds this in meaningful contexts. The way you build on it from a personal to communal framing is a good buildup. Also, the way it's framed as a problem is quite interesting and I think provides opportunites for the kinds of thinking you say you want.

So your But Why slide, I like it. Interesting challenge is going to be - how do you SUPPORT that transition during these activities, performances, etc? ... which you cite in your next slides! So you're thinking ahead (or like I think which is I think... a good thing?) Your thought process is :thumbsup: 

Your assessment rubrics also ILLUSTRATE how you think about performances/learning and is helpful for me to understand you're thinking of what goes into the learning/thinking. Reasoned and hi fidelity.

...Audio and Note Recorders... but HOW would you want them to use these in a way that will get them to think about things in certain ways?


General Comments on Communicating Ideas
---

If I ask something like:
> Is it possible to for learners to X?

And your answer is:
> It is not possible for learners to X because they have to X.

Is this response sufficient?

VS.

> It is not possible. Here's reasons why. And here is an example based on the reasoning.

On VISUALS:

Side note but when you're presenting really think about the kinds of images/imagery you're using. Is it used to really help *communicate complex ideas*, persuade your point, BUILD your argument? Or is it there as candy?

For example - Using a diagram to organize main ideas in ways to illustrate things like the intersection of two domains is a smart way to use images that is contributing to the coherence of your presentation. Having a random image just to avoid all-text, images that superficially relate to the theme of your talk but don't contribute to your argument directly - is for advertising majors. Isn't to say that images can't be used to evoke emotion - if that's part of your persuasive strategy. But WHAT does the image serve to do?

Another great way to use images is to show examples. Example rubrics, example screenshots with annotations of critical moments that illustrate your story of how learners might use something... these kinds of usages help make your point. Meanwhile, just showing the tool - "here's an arbitrary photo of the tool" without using that imagery to talk about the important aspects of it - ... you get the point.

On MUSIC:

In general I'd avoid it for this kind of project. A good exception would be if your learning goals have to do with music and you're using a music clip as an example to make your argument, point, communicate an important idea that you cannot otherwise.

On COMMUNICATING to Goldfish:

People are like goldfish - they will not remember things you say like you remember because you've spent a week working on this. They're only 3 min into your talk. It's a good communicative device to use references to important things to remind listeners of how what you're talking about now links back to a prior important idea and fits into your larger argument.

Communicative Strategies and Devices:

- Scholarly Stories are Positions/Arguments
- Cognitive Mapping
- 3 Takeaway Rule of Thumb
- Referencing

Scholarly writing, speaking, etc. and more - probably most any speech really is persuasive. You have a position and you are arguing to your audience that they should accept this position under the assumption they come into your talk without having such a position. If someone comes into your talk and leaves with zero change - they should have just not bothered. You might say "but my talk isn't about convincing them A or B. It's about making them think about A and B." Well guess what? "Making them think about A or B" that thinking about A or B is IMPORTANT is your position and argument. So use this to think about how you talk about your ideas. You're presenting a design - you're trying to convince your audience this design is: 1) worthwhile, 2) gonna work. And for class purposes there might be another thing which is: 3) convince Jin you've been studying.

Cognitive Mapping: People will understand future things better if they know where it fits in the larger scheme of things. A good way to introduce ideas is to also provide a summary map of the narrative journey you're about to take - the important "milestone/points" of your talk. That way when you get to that part, they have an idea of how what you're talking about fits into the larger narrative goal.

3 Takeaway Rule of Thumb: Three is arbitrary but it highlights that people cannot remember multiple multiple things in short fast amounts of time. Thinking about "If they only takeaway 3 things what would I want them to takeaway?" is a strategy you can use to think of what is the most important points/arguments you want to make convincingly - in order to ORGANIZE how you talk about the details. For example, if one takeaway you identify is "I want listeners to know that this design is about making X subject matter authentic" then as you go through your goals, performances, assessments... you can talk about all these things particularly from the lens of authenticity to hammer away at your point. If done right, your 3 takeaways should all be directly contributing to the larger argument you're trying to make.

Referencing: I don't mean APA references here. What I mean is referencing your argument, map, takeaways, whatnot. People will forget the previous slide very quickly. If you provide a map, let people know what the takeaways are going to be. Then as you talk about different ideas which are building on your argument, it's helpful to REFERENCE which point this elaboration supports and how it ties back to the main argument. By reminding readers - Remember I said we'd talk about this important takeaway/point? Here's how this stuff directly relates and builds on the prior takeaway etc. Or, remember understanding goal 1? Here it is again for your goldfish brain. Here's how we approach this goal and solve the challenges related to it. It helps listeners (who are consequently, learners as well) construct their mental models of what you're saying. So think about this. Are you guys progressing your narrative based on the order of the framework? Or the order of your argument? (You'll probably still use the same order going through gentop, undgoals, perfs, assess, comm but how you approach it will probably slightly change with this mental shift.)


