Contents:
Introduction
The class
Discussion
Discussion sections
Curriculum downloads
Student feedback
Contact us
Discussion sections
Goals of discussion sections The primary goal of our discussion sections is to give students an opportunity to interact with the material in ways that help them make connections between natural hazards and their own lives. We want to help students build links between geoscience and other academic subjects. Also, discussion sections are intended to provide a more personal classroom environment so that students feel known and appreciated. How are discussion sections structured? Discussion sections consist of 50-minute blocks in which students (no more than 16) meet with a Teaching Asssistant (T.A.) in a designated place. In the fall semester of 2002, we offered 10 discussion sections, all scheduled to fall between the two large class meetings (Tuesday and Thursday evenings). Discussion sections are required for our students, becuase we want all students to have the experiences we are providing, not just the highly motivated students who would participate in an optional discussion section. What is a typical discussion section like? Each section begins with an activity designed to involve the students in the subject of the week. Some weeks students will work with real data, such as plotting hurricane movements or graphing precipitation vs. discharge. Other weeks students will physically model natural processes, such as landslides or bolide impacts. Some activities draw upon other fields of interest, such as reading business articles or studying artisitic depictions of historic disasters. In all cases, the focus of the activities is not on achieving a certain result, but rather on experiencing the activity. For example, it is not important that students modeling a bolide impact get their impact angle exactly right, but that they create an impact for themselves and personally observe the formation of craters. Not providing a strict framework for the activity allows students to experiment for themselves, and helps lead into an effective discussion. The second half of each section is the discussion itself. When students have spent sufficient time with the activity, the T.A. gathers their attention and initiates a discussion of the subject. This usually begins with a few simple questions that review the activity and the subject and get students in a thinking mode, before moving on to deeper questions. As the discussion continues, the presence of the T.A. becomes less and less important as the students get involved and take over. While our curriculum provides a set of suggested prompts for discussion, students will sometimes want to pursue other lines of thought or questioning, which should be encouraged. As time grows short, the T.A. wraps up the discussion with a few questions or observations based on what has occured, and the students leave, hopefully still talking amonst themselves. How did discussion sections work in practice? We offered discussion sections for the first time in the fall semester of 2002, and achieved mixed results. In their initial form, sections were designed around our own personal ideas of what such a class should be like, with little consultation of educational literature or practices. We generally required students to turn in some form of classwork, such as a rudimentary map of their impact craters, or a short essay based on the business journal articles they had just read. Discussions were initially run with little knowledge of proper methods for doing so, and met with mixed results. As the semester progressed, we learned more about proper discussion techniques, clarified our goals for these sections, and applied these new ideas to later sections. We removed arbitrary assignments like in-class essay writing and focused on the process of the activity rather than the product. As T.A.s became more knowledgeable about proper discussion technique, our discussions progressed from somewhat dry question-and-answer sessions to real discussions that students enjoyed more. The curriculum and ideas we present here reflect not only the theoretical ideas supported by educational research, but our practical experience with what worked and what didn't work in a university setting. How are discussion sections assessed? Discussion section grades are based on attendance and participation, not on product or factual knowledge. Since our goal in offering these sections was not to teach facts, but to provide experiences, it made more sense to grade students on their participation. This also provided students with a balanced grading scheme, so that factual (quizzes) and experiental (discussion sections) learning counted for similar percentages on their final grade (see The Class for more on overall assessment). During the fall 2002 semester, we graded discussion sections on a 3-point scale similar to the "check, check plus, check minus" system used in many settings. Under this system, students whose participation in sections was average (i.e. just there, not going out of their way to participate) earned a 2, while students who went above and beyond earned a 3, and students who were disruptive or otherwise below average earned a 1. We found this a very difficult system to use consistently, partly because each discussion section and each week's activity was so different. We also did not generate a rigourous and thorough enough rubric for what was expected of students in section. While this resulted in somewhat inflated grades, the positive side was that students quickly learned they were not being graded on what they "supposed to learn" in section, and seemed to relax and participate more readily in activities and discussions. We feel that the concept of grading sections on participation and not product is a good one, and will use a more rigorous grading scheme in the future. Curriciulum Downloads: Read about specific discussion sections and download PDFs |