Game Show vs. Reality Show

The program I'm teaching now has an assessment structure where Multiple-Choice Questions portion is allocated 30% and a Group Report 20%. Another 50% goes to a final exam which, alas, also includes an MCQ segment.

I confess this gets to me. I mean, MCQs' are more often than not a memory game. Not only is pointless memorisation of definitions encouraged, answering via elimination and guessing will always be a temptation. It's like we're preparing our students to be game-show experts when in the real world, the skills required to succeed usually approximate those in reality-show scenarios.

Compare:

• GAME show: general knowledge/trivia, guessing, luck, fastest to the timer, individual memory, abstract and 'useless' information, closed book, IQ, etc.
  
• REALITY show: people skills, organisation/managerial skills, planning / forward-looking, negotiation / persuasion, relationship-building, conflict management, "open book", EQ, etc.

It may not be a bad idea to introduce Apprentice-style projects to high-school kids as a main form of assessment (instead of merely something the Entrepreneur Club organises once in a while). Likewise, as I suggested to a group of Form 3 kids, it might be better to reduce the number of subjects taken for SPM and spend the time/effort doing, say, free-of-charge internship at a local bank or corporation.

A good education isn't about the number of As' one scores at the end of school. It's the portfolio of skills one has mastered for use at the start of the next phase of education - life itself.

The First Is the Only

Denzel Washington - in a movie I can't recall - told his terrorist investigation team that after a building blows up, the first 24 hours of investigation are the only 24 hours.

I'm exaggerating, but I think it works with students, too. The first lesson is, strangely enough, the 'only' lesson with them. Mess up your first hour with them (i.e. bore them, anger them, confuse them) and you've had it. They'll always remember.

On the other hand, do a great first job, and you've stamped solid expectancy upon your listeners. This doesn't of course guarantee success the second round but it's easier to go into Round 2 with a good Round 1 then to rescue the game in Round 2 after a horrendous Round 1.

TV producers know this. Hence, the high-quality pilot episode. Ditto, the pilot lesson.

(Now I remember the movie. It's called The Siege where DW starred opposite Bruce Willis. Now if only I put my memory cells to more useful endeavours...)

Value-Adding Lectures

Lecturers contribute a bare minimum if all they do is repeat what's in the text or the slides. The situation is worse if you have a group of students (as I believe I do) who are independent learners and can absorb all the basic references without much help.

What, then, ought lecturers do to add value? Here are some ideas, by no means exhaustive:

• 
  
  Give a fresh slant to what's in the textbooks - either give a new perspective or just challenge everything the writer says
  
  
  
• 
  
  Lecture on a related sub-topic (one not in the generic handouts)
  
  
  
• 
  
  Facilitate a discussion or a case-study (thus taking the class away from recall-mode to application-mode)
  
  
  
• 
  
  Get the students to present
  
  
  
• 
  
  Show a video
  
  
  
• 
  
  Facilitate a project which takes them out of the classroom (kinda like a case-study on steroids)
  
  
  
• 
  
  What else?
  
  
  

Adding value nowadays usually involves creating new value. Whatever this is, it's probably not repeating what's already available.

All At Once

Today a colleague lecturing in law shared with me a great class activity. This would work for subjects like Law (obviously), Literature and Philosophy where a compelling case needs to be presented.

Select about half a dozen students, get them to prepare their case/speech/argument/whatever, group them in a circle, and make them talk simultaneously.

The rest of the students (who could be standing anywhere or even allowed to move from speaker to speaker) would be instructed to listen carefully and select the speaker they find most interesting. The speaker with the highest number of votes 'win'. Then we change speakers and go again.

All the ingredients for charged-up learner-centered learning are here:

• multi-directional communication (instead of I-talk-you-all-listen-ism)
• a competitive element with the class as a whole judging the winners (and not the facilitator)
• initiative and creativity i.e. the students shape the learning (as opposed to the facilitator deciding exactly how and what will happen)
• real-world simulation where we really do have to match our voices/performances against that of others (compared to totally abstracted superficial scenarios)

That's what it's all about.

Knowing

In my Problem-Solving class I like to put up common riddles and conundrums on the slides. I use these to illustrate different kinds of problems and (hopefully) encourage reflection on the students' own problem-solving approach (there are at least two: the Helicopter approach and the Path-Finder approach, but this for another day).

Some of the problems I put up have been floating around the Web for a few years, so it's inevitable that some students would already know the solution. In order to not 'spoil' the experience of those students who have not yet come across the problem, I then usually tell students already in-the-know to keep quiet.

Hold your horses. Let your friends try. Snicker all you want, but let them go through the experience themselves.

But guess what? Of the students who already know the answer, more than half of them simply HAVE to reveal it to their friends barely 7.5 seconds after the (obviously familiar) problem is shown. These students cannot resist letting their friends know that they know the answer.

That's us, isn't it? We'll break explicit rules to prove we know something. Especially if there's a chance someone else will say they know it too. And if they say it first, where's the fun/credit for us?

So here's a small tip if you want to get your listeners to speak up especially in those less-than-optimal learning times: Appeal to their pride of knowedge. Let them show they know. Best of all, make it look like the knowers are in a clearly better position than the non-knowers.

This keeps them snug and, most importantly, eager to know what comes next. I'm sure all presenters could live with that.

5 Tactics

Something I'm working on...

View more OpenOffice presentations from Alwyn Lau.

The Set Induction

It's that 'thing' you do before the lesson begins. It's that (non)-lesson on the margins of the lesson, the (non)-teaching prior to teaching. It's the small storying to open up ears for the big story. It's the casual narrative which could decide the significance of the formal delivery. It's the pseudo-point that postpones, yet heightens the interest in, getting-to-the-point.

I've only heard about it an educational context, but it's surely relevant for:

• a marketing presentation
• a initial project briefing
• a sermon!
• a lecture to one's kids
• a request (of any kind)
• a business proposal
• a piece of advice

The Tell 'Em Strategy?

"Tell em what you are going to tell em, tell em, tell em what you told em" - this is standard (because reasonably sound) piece of advice normally given during courses on how to teach, do presentations, etc.

What's wrong with laying out everything for the participants, being consistent with what you said you would say, then repeating it all over again at the end so they remember well?

What's bad about all this, right? Quite a bit:

1. Tell 'em what you are going to tell 'em

What for? I mean, would you like to read a summary of the story before you get into the story? Would you like the Director to explain the structure of the movie before the show begins?

Suspense. Anticipation. Unpredictability. These, when manipulated well, are what make a great presentation great.

Do you really want to know the headings of all the sections from slide 1 onwards? Can't we be trusted with our ability to know what to do with the particular information/communication when we get to it?

Never tell the congregation or students or participants that you've "three points" to make. It's a waste of breath and the stage-setting doesn't help the mood.

2. Tell 'em

Of course we can't skip this part. Except I'd add: show 'em, sing it to 'em, get them to tell 'em themselves(!), or even DON'T tell 'em!

Also, for God's sake, tell them stuff they don't expect. Keep them on the ropes, one surprise after another - rock their states and make sure they never get the chance to believe they've heard (no, experienced) your presentation before.

3. Tell 'em what you told 'em

No no no. Get them to summarise what's just been presented. Get them to tell you more! Better yet, get them to compete to see who can do the final 'telling' in the most creative/coherent/content-rich way which i. summarizes what was presented and ii. expresses the participant(s)' unique perspectives of what's told.

Also, elicit tactics on how to use what's been told (this takes being told for granted, duh).

5 Teaching Essentials

After 15 school terms, 30 assessments (involving the marking of no less than 50 papers each time), and about 1,000 classes (of 80 minutes each) I am confident of only a few things about teaching (none of which are very heavily covered in teacher induction):

1. You have GOT to make friends with the kids (yes, even those whose heads you want to use as punching bags). No friendship, no connection; no connection, no point. This means actively going up to a kid, shaking hands, saying how-are-you, asking them about life in general, etc. The child is a person and not a teaching project.

2. You have GOT to stop teaching sometimes (even in the middle of 'official' lesson times) and tell some great stories. If these stories are related to the subject, excellent. If not, then too bad for the subject.

3. You have GOT to make it a habit to use images. It's perfectly fine to stare at an image, look blank, say, "Now why did I put this there?" and ask the kids what they think. Seriously.

4. You have GOT to love your subject. Like fear and anger, the kids can sniff indifference or boredom from a mile off. How do you love it? Almost about the same way you learn to love people: act as if you do. So, if you absolutely loved Organic Chemistry, what would you be doing? Perhaps you'd be talking about it the way soccer fans talk about a great game, or reading up all the 'unnecessary' material on it, or collecting loads of websites, or - you get the point.

5. You have GOT to let the kids teach you a thing or two. Let it be anything. I suppose this is part of the whole friendship gig/deal. And c'mon, who's to say we 'adults' know everything, eh?