Development Plan

If I knew, I wouldn't be doing this.... :-)

Okay, okay. Learning more about how to set up problem-based learning in an Intro to IS context would be valuable. To some extent, I don't really see how to do it; again, so much of the course is simply learning vocabulary. Sitting down and talking for a while with an expert in the domain would help.

For instance, I did get a chance to chat about the problem with our instructor for the "designing instruction" day, and she had an excellent suggestion that I had not considered. Rather than presenting a case and then asking the class at large for answers, I put them into groups, and had the group come up with answers; and then I asked each of the groups for their answers. This overcomes a lot of the students' reluctance to appear wrong in front of their peers, and has helped a good deal. Again, something I would never have thought of; I'm a loner tech geek who was never afraid to answer publicly. I was the student that always had their hand up. So it's hard for me to figure out what would work for the others.

So, to a large extent, my plan is exactly what I'm doing: follow the pedagogical certificate, take advantage of any training sessions I can, and seek out comment from others whenever I can.

ATI Results

I filled this out with reference to the Introduction to Information Systems class. In many ways, this class is largely about vocabulary-- what do the terms used in talking about information systems mean? However, my guru-nature leads me to want to give them more than that in class. I think that building up a knowledge of how one uses the systems will help them to better remember what the terms themselves mean.
My scores were:
Information Transfer: 21
Conceptual Change: 59

Of the approaches listed, I feel that what I am trying to do, with or without success, is approach D: a student-focused strategy aimed at students developing their conceptions. I think approach E is probably not viable, as I don't think that many of them have much experience with IS in an organizational context. Yes, they all use smartphones and computers; but they don't really know anything beyond that. The kind of multi-user task focused system used in business is not the same, even to multi-user task focused systems like World of Warcraft. :-)

Does this surprise me? Only to the extent of how large the score difference is. Given the actualities of the students and the course, I thought they would be closer to one another.

Is this the best approach? I think so; but I am fully prepared to hear argument about that. :-)

Changing my approach: I would really prefer for class time to be much more interactive than it is. While I can get them answering questions about cases, I rarely seem able to get them to argue about it among themselves. I would like to have a lot more of that.

Teaching fit: again, I think it's pretty good, or would be if the students cooperated more. :-)

Teaching Philosophy

In the tech world, we have people we called gurus, and people we called wizards. These are the people who can make a computer do anything, and are the go-to people when you had a hard task that you didn't know how to approach. Both types are equally talented technically, but they have a different method of interacting with people who come to them for advice.
Wizards feel that their knowledge is their valuable asset. They carefully hoard the fundamental information. When you ask them how to do something, they will tell you exactly how to do it, and nothing else.

Gurus feel that their ability to apply knowledge is their valuable asset. When you ask one of them for help, they will give you information about why the answer they provide is the right one.

Both give you the information you need to solve the problem. But the wizard counts on you coming back with fundamentally the same question time after time. The guru is bored by that, and doesn't want to hear the same questions, so they share as much information as possible. Wizards view their knowledge as zero-sum, gurus as synergetic.

I was one of the gurus. I see my role in teaching as similar. Yes, I have knowledge that the students don't. But what is interesting is to apply the knowledge. I want them to have done what they could to have declarative knowledge before they come to class, and then I work with them to see how they can apply that knowledge, also imparting some extra declarative knowledge in the process.

So I don't see myself as so much a guide or mentor, as a well-seasoned fellow traveler.

What I have done in the past is too much lecturing, sharing the additional information that the students can get from me beyond what is in their textbooks. But this is unsatisfying to me as a guru-- I want to have a conversation with them, not present them with the holy knowledge like a wizard.

So I am trying to do more work using case studies, but would like to start doing more things with problem-based learning; I think it is a very promising approach.