20%Learning Outcomes: 2 & 3
Preparation and facilitation in pairs
- Secret Plan. Develop at workshop in week prior to facilitation. Submit at your facilitation. 10%
- Tutorial Co-Facilitation. Facilitation topics allocated in the first week. 10%
30%Learning Outcomes: 3
in multidisciplinary groups of four
- Presentation. Week 7 Tutorials. 5%
- Final Artefact. by Week 8 Tutorials. 25%
50%Learning Outcomes: 2 & 3
- Tutorial tickets. before each tutorial, weeks 4-10. 10%
- Oral Presentation. Week 12 tutorials. 5%
- Exploration. Week 13. 25%
- Peer Review. during Week 12. 10%
Tutorial facilitation (20%)
During the course, every student is required to co-facilitate one tutorial. Your task in facilitating a 90-minute tutorial is to maximise your classmate’s learning about the week’s panel topic.
Workshop Ticket – required, not marked
Please complete the reading for the week and individually prepare an idea for how you can run the tutorial (including any further resources). This should be sketched out on no more than an A4 piece of paper.
Workshop A – required, not marked
Facilitators need to attend a workshop 10-11am run by Chris one week before the panel to discuss and develop your tutorial. In this session, we’ll begin to develop your Secret Plan, and prompting question for the tutorial to consider.
Focus Question (Tutorial Ticket) Forum
Please disclose your prompting question and any other resources you would like your classmates to engage with at the end of the preceding tutorial. Please post these on the Focus Question (Tutorial Ticket) forum by this time so that students can provide responses.
Secret Plan 10%
Your secret plan is your guide for running the tutorial. This should be developed collaboratively, and you have the opportunity to discuss your draft plan after the topic panel (1-2pm) with Chris. Submit your plan to your tutor on arrival at your facilitated tutorial.
Tutorial Facilitation 10%
Maximise your classmate’s learning in a 60-minute tutorial. Co-facilitators will get equal marks unless issues are raised with your tutor. You should aim to draw connections from the reading and the panel, and develop an engaging learning environment. Your tutor will seek feedback from your classmates.
A task of the first tutorial will be to discuss what makes an effective facilitation and to discuss criteria that will influence how tutors assess each facilitation.
Applies to both the Secret Plan and Facilitation. All criteria weighted equally:
- encourages high quality discussion/exchange of ideas
- effectively relating the tutorial to the course themes in a way that maximises student learning
- maintaining clarity and logical progressions of ideas to an effective conclusion
- clear instructions that assist in achieving above points
- ability to respond well to questions including the explanation of concepts
- a generic template for your tutorial ‘Secret Plan‘
Group Project (30%)
The Group Research Project is a key learning and assessment task for the course. It will be used in the first half of the course to develop and demonstrate achievement of the course learning outcomes.
Your task is to explore in depth a piece of fundamental, popular or accepted knowledge. The final submission should be accessible to someone with no knowledge of the topic.
Week 3 Roundtable (not assessed).
The Roundtable will be a workshop run by your tutor to help define your group’s thinking to the rest of your tutorial in a constructive environment.
Expert Interview (not assessed)
A requirement of this assessment is to organise and interview an expert around your topic. This will likely be an ANU academic, but could be from outside the university. Your group may wish to organise an interview earlier or later in the process, but it will be up to your group to organise. Your tutor and Chris can help if you’re stuck.
Presentation – Week 7 Tutorials (5%)
Your group will provide a 3-minute presentation of the knowledge that you have identified (creativity encouraged).
Final Artefact – by Week 8 Tutorials (25%)
The final artefact will be made up of:
- (10%) a 750-word layman’s explanation of the knowledge that you’ve examined. This could include an explanation of why, where and how this knowledge has evolved or why it’s important to the body of knowledge. The best explanations will be forwarded to Woroni for publication.
- (5%) a 250-word summary of the findings from the expert interview, and how that has influenced your group’s understanding of the knowledge. This could be supplemented with your notes from the interview.
- (10%) a piece of modern knowledge that can be used to spread awareness of this knowledge. This could be a video, podcast, zine, article, Wikipedia-style page, infographic, smartphone app, instructable, travel guide, etc. As a indication on length, it’s expected that this knowledge could be ‘consumed’ in 5 minutes.
Groups will be able to explore their own topic, in consultation with their tutor and Chris. Assistance can be offered to groups who are having trouble defining an appropriate topic.
Your individual mark for the group project will be determined by first awarding a group mark in accordance with the above breakdown. Your group will be asked in the Week 3 Roundtable to devise a process of peer evaluation to be used to determine any adjustments to reflect contribution to the project. Any such adjustments will be consultative.
The group will be awarded a mark based on these criteria (all marking criteria are applied equally):
- demonstrated awareness of academic research and its relationship to knowledge creation (L01)
- demonstrated understanding of alternative viewpoints or thinking about the knowledge (L02)
- evidence of critical thinking about the nature of knowledge and the learning process (L03)
- effective communication of ideas (LO4)
This will include some resources on working in teams, presenting, and interviewing.
Learning Portfolio & Peer Review (50%)
This is a piece of work that is developed over the whole semester, and will be the culmination and evidence of the knowledge that you have engaged with over the whole semester.
There are three parts to the submission:
- (5%) 3-min Oral of a Gap in the Knowledge in Week 12 tutorials
- (25%) An exploration of a Gap in the Knowledge artefact (the Learning Portfolio) in Week 13
- (10%) Weekly tutorial ticket submissions (submitted in a WATTLE forum weeks 4-10, and then submitted alongside your Learning Portfolio)
In addition, you will have the opportunity to have your 25% exploration peer reviewed. This is not compulsory, but very highly recommended. In turn, you will review two of your peer’s explorations during week 12 for:
- (10%) 2 x 5% Peer Review of others’ artefacts
Weekly tutorial tickets (10%)
The tutorial tickets are the pre-work for your tutorial between weeks 4-10. Each week, these should be about 150-200 words, and should take you about 15 minutes to write. You should complete the topic’s Reading or Resources before undertaking this entry, and the focus question each week should serve as a starting point. The collection and development of these can be seen as the ‘first draft’ of your portfolio, and will be used by your facilitators to enrich your tutorial. These are to be submitted on WATTLE by Wednesday night each week, and you are encouraged to read the tickets of others. The tickets should be collated at the end of the course, and submitted as an annex of your learning portfolio.
Exploration of a Knowledge Gap (25%)
Your learning portfolio is an exploration of a gap in the knowledge arising from the group projects. You may choose to investigate your group’s topic, or another group’s. This could be an application, research, investigation, or synthesis on the gap in three knowledge, and should include some reflective elements that tether the exploration to your learning in the course. This part of the portfolio will be peer-reviewed in week 12, and your final submission should include a reflection on this process (a half-page Peer Review critique).
Alternative presentation formats are encouraged. For example it could be a visual diary, blog, photo journal, video series, critical essay, travel guide, radio documentary, advocate website, Wikipedia entry, Zine, collection of interviews or letters, etc. The learning portfolio should be between 15-20 pages or 2,500-3,000 words, or be ‘consumed’ in 10-15 minutes.
Oral Presentation (5%)
The oral presentation is an opportunity to share your Learning Portfolio knowledge with the rest of the class, and get formative feedback about your approach. You will have 3 minutes to convey your topic, so curating your presentation will be quite important. You may use whatever resources you like (slides, handouts, etc). There will be an opportunity for peers to ask questions.
Peer Review (10%)
You will be asked to provide critical peer review for two classmate’s Learning Portfolio (Exploration of a Knowledge Gap). The peer review process is how scholarship is accepted and grows in academia, and it is expected that your comments will be both useful for the reviewer and for you ahead of presenting your final portfolio.
All parts will be marked using the same criteria, except for the peer review. All criteria have equal weight.
- a defined scope of academic research and its relationship to broader concepts of knowledge and knowledge creation (LO1)
- demonstration of multiple perspectives in constructing knowledge (LO2)
- critical argument, reflection, or connections about the nature of knowledge and the learning process (LO3)
- effective communication conveying meaning (LO4)
Please note that:
- the Learning Portfolio should also include a half-page peer review critique (not included in word count, etc)
- although the tutorial tickets are submitted on WATTLE throughout semester and then compiled in the portfolio for assessment, the tickets must be submitted before your tutorial each week, otherwise these will not be considered. It’s not necessary to change the tickets for the final submission, but it might be worthwhile to reflect on your tickets strongly (use them as a reference) throughout your portfolio.
The Peer Review will be marked out of 5 (x2), and the basis of the marking will be its ‘usefulness’ to the author. A ‘clearly useful’ peer review would include:
- critical analysis of the ideas in the portfolio
- suggestions on how to improve the portfolio against the marking criteria
- opportunities for the author to extend or broaden their work (for example, providing new resources)