|
Ideally you are expected to meet your students at each stage
of their projects. This suggestive procedure is designed with
this ideal as the default arrangement.
The first thing you do is to work out a timetable of appointments
with each of your students. Note that this is the timetable
of you meeting your students, not the timetable of your students'
projects. The two timetables are totally different in function.
You can summon all the students you are going to supervise
together for the first meeting. But ideally, if possible,
you meet them on the individual basis. The items on the first
meeting's agenda will include the following.
 |
Check to see if they have done (1) a quick
survey of the course book to get an overall picture of
what they are expected to do; (2) a close study of Unit
1 so they know that their project will take 6 stages to
complete. |
 |
Check to see if they are familiar with
how the course is going to be assessed. |
 |
Help them draw an initial project timetable
according to the University academic calendar, e.g. by
what date students should reach what stage, etc. |
 |
Discuss the list of problems your students
have prepared, and help them choose one that is suitable.
|
 |
Assess the performance of your students
against this checklist. |
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores
|
Stage 1 |
5% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
decided on a problem to be researched, and discussed
and agreed the problem with the tutor |
1 point |
|
chosen a relevant problem from his/her own teaching
experience |
1 point |
|
chosen a problem that can be researched within
such a project |
1 point |
|
expressed the problem in clear, accurate and unambiguous
English |
1 point |
|
demonstrated that Stage One has been fully understood
and worked out a project timetable |
1 point |
|
Total possible points |
5 points |
|
|
It might be a very good idea to have a copy of the checklist
for each student and put it into their portfolio. This helps
you monitor their project process.
At the end of the tutorial, you must make it absolutely clear
to your students what you would expect them to do before the
next appointment. In other words, you help students work out
a list of actions to be taken before the next
appointment. You may even design a standard form to keep tracking.
It may look like this:
Actions-to-Be-Taken for Stage ______
|
Student name: _______ |
Date: _______ |
Action |
Description |
Product |
Due |
Problem analysis |
Using analytic method |
300 word report |
D___ M___ |
Using Socratic dialogue |
300 word report |
D___ M___ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tutor signature _______ |
Student's signature ________ |
Sum up
Up to this point we have outlined a general procedure for
your first tutorial. The same operation principle applies
to the remaining stages of the project, with the details,
of course, being varied from stage to stage.
For the ease of your reference, the performance checklists
for stages 2-6 are reproduced below.
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores
|
Stage 2 |
10% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
chosen one or more methods of problem analysis |
1 point |
|
selected methods suitable to the problem |
1 point |
|
applied the problem analysis correctly to his/her
own problem |
1 point |
|
written in full the stages that the problem analysis
took |
1 point |
|
demonstrated that the methods of problem analysis
have been understood |
1 point |
|
reached sensible conclusions about the nature
of the problem |
1 point |
|
defined the problem more clearly |
1 point |
|
demonstrated that the problem can be researched
in this project |
1 point |
|
expressed this stage in clear, accurate and unambiguous
English |
2 points |
|
Total possible points |
10 points |
|
|
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores |
Stage 3 |
20% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
formulated a clear, relevant and realistic project
objective |
1 point |
|
formulated a clear, relevant and provable project
hypothesis |
1 point |
|
written the rationale for his/her own project |
1 point |
|
expressed the rationale in clear, accurate and
unambiguous English |
1 point |
|
designed activities to test the hypothesis |
1 point |
|
designed an adequate amount of activities (to
cover 3-4 weeks of teaching) |
2 points |
|
designed original activities relevant to the teaching
material used (i.e. based on the relevant units
of the school textbook being taught) |
4 points |
|
written out the activities in clear, accurate
and unambiguous English |
2 points |
|
stated clearly the objectives of the activities
and their relationship to the hypothesis |
2 points |
|
included a detailed description of the procedure
of how the activities will be used by the teacher
and the students |
2 points |
|
applied the Communicative Approach learnt from
the previous courses in the design of the activities |
2 points |
|
included a detailed timetable of how and when
the activities will be used in the classroom |
1 point |
|
Total possible points |
20 points |
|
|
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores
|
Stage 4 |
30% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
designed the title page of the project and written
it out clearly |
1 point |
|
listed the contents of the project report in an
adequate order |
1 point |
|
designed the timetable of the whole project and
written it out clearly |
1 point |
|
included the stages to be followed and listed
all the methods and materials used |
1 point |
|
implemented the project by using the specially-designed
activities in class |
5 points |
|
collected the results, such as students' response
and feedback, teachers' observation, etc. (on
paper, on tape, etc.) |
5 points |
|
proved the project was indeed implemented according
to the given stages |
2 points |
|
kept a written record of the project implementation |
3 points |
|
collected the results in an acceptable scientific
way |
3 points |
|
interpreted the results in the light of the hypothesis |
3 points |
|
shown the hypothesis has been proved or disproved |
2 points |
|
come to an intelligent conclusion regarding the
research done on the problem identified |
3 points |
|
Total possible points |
30 points |
|
|
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores
|
Stage 5 |
5% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
evaluated the project by asking and answering
relevant questions on every aspect of it |
2 point |
|
examined the project critically and objectively |
1 point |
|
shown that he/she has understood the nature of
evaluation |
1 point |
|
expressed the evaluation in clear, accurate and
unambiguous English |
1 point |
|
Total possible points |
5 points |
|
|
Student's name ____________
Appointment Date ____________
|
Stardard
marks
|
Actual
scores
|
Stage 6 |
30% |
|
The learner has -- |
|
|
given a title page |
1 point |
|
given an accurate abstract of the report |
1 point |
|
included a correct and appropriate list of contents |
1 point |
|
included the project objective |
1 point |
|
included the project hypothesis |
1 point |
|
included the project rationale |
1 point |
|
written the report legibly in clear, accurate
and unambiguous English |
5 points |
|
written the report in an appropriate formal style |
2 points |
|
arranged the text of the report in a logical and
comprehensible manner |
2 points |
|
given all the relevant facts of the planning,
implementation and evaluation of the project |
6 points |
|
expressed sensible and intelligent conclusions |
2 points |
|
included a bibliography |
1 point |
|
written the bibliography correctly (in alphabetical
order under the surname of the author or editor,
included full title, date of publication, publisher) |
2 points |
|
included all the relevant materials (questionnaires
if used, teaching materials, tables of results,
etc.) as appendices correctly numbered and placed
at the back of the report |
3 points |
|
referred to the appendices correctly in the text
of the report |
1 point |
|
Total possible points |
30 points |
|
|

|
|