EDU221ClassroomManagementPresentationExamples

__Examples of Presentation Activities and The Corresponding Engagement and Technology Scores__
need to add categories for when presenters use poll anywhere, socratic method website, today's meeting, etc. about the content on the wiki in small groups at a big computer or one-on-one with laptops || 1 (100% engagement) || .5 (passive/ Type I) || 0 || .25 if students are trying to read and listen to you talk about something else at the same time || (see above based on ||  || • If group tasks are of different caliber (e.g., one group of has been assigned to have a conversation but a second group has been assigned to create a Type II technology product), I usually average the scores. • If groups are going to rotate through a series of station, I will assess each station once for an entire station time slot and rotate through all the stations just like the students. • If one group is done and "just killing time," the engagement score will drop since not all students are engaged in uncovering the content. (Hint: Have extra activities or on-topic discussion starters ready "just in case.") || If presenters leave directions on the main screen or a timer running on the main screen, that counts as Type I usage of technology (.25) for the first 2 minutes only (because students typically aren't looking up at it anymore after they get going on their work or are only referring to it for quick moments and not the entire time) ||
 * ===//Example of what might be observed//=== || ===//Engagement Score//=== || ===//Student Technology Score//=== || ===//Teacher/Presenter Technology Score//=== ||
 * READING/TALKING ||  ||   ||   ||
 * Presenters reading aloud to the class or "talking about" a reading or a PowerPoint slide or wiki page OR presenter(s) talking to class (content, directions,...) about the content || .25 -- everyone's paying attention but nobody is actively engaged || 0 || .25 (Type I) if reading from a PowerPoint slide or wiki page; 0 if reading from a book or paper; 0 if just talking ||
 * Students reading something
 * Students reading a book or a handout (one per person) about the content || 1 (100% engagement) || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students looking/reading about the content and presenter talking at the same time...potentially very engaging OR very distracting (do you want me to look at this or listen to you) || 1 if you're talking about what's on the handout
 * CLASS DISCUSSION || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Presenter is doing most of the talking and calling on one student at a time to discuss content || .25 -- everyone's paying attention and only 1 student is actively engaged || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students are doing most of the talking (presenter is only guiding or managing or monitoring the discussion) but only one person is talking at a time; topic of discussion is staying on the content || .5 -- probably not half the class is actively engaged at a time, but there is more engagement (.5 is generous but also easier math) || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students are having high energy conversation (on the topic) and everyone is getting a turn (presenter is facilitating to ensure this happens) || .75 -- high energy usually means active attention; knowing you're going to get a turn (whether you want it or not) tends to make everyone a little more engaged (again, generous scoring) ||  ||   ||
 * Students are discussing with a partner or someone immediately around them (not formal group work) about the content || 1 -- everyone's engaged as an active listener or as a presenter and those roles are going to switch || 0 || 0 ||
 * GROUP WORK/ ACTIVITY || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Students working in small groups at a station reading/looking through text, images, graphics on a wiki or Web site (not audio, video, or animation) to answer a specific question(s) about the content (including the conversation they're having while doing it as long as it's a reasonable mix of computer use and conversation) || 1 (100% engagement) || .5 || 0 ||
 * Students working in groups to create a product without technology (for example a skit or a poster) related to the content || 1 || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students working in groups to create a product using technology in a Type I way (writing on a wiki, creating a Word document,...) that is about the content || 1 || .5 || 0 ||
 * Students working in groups to create a product using technology in a Type II way (making a Comic Life, a Glogster, an audio recording, . . . ) that is about the content || 1 || 1 || 0 ||
 * Students are working in groups without a time limit. Some groups have finished and have nothing specific to do while waiting for others to finish || a fraction based on what percentage of students are still engaged and how many are waiting || this stays the same as long as at least half the class is still working on content; will go down if a large percentage are done || this stays the same as long as at least half the class is still working on content; will go down if a large percentage are done ||
 * Students participating in a whole group activity where they are up and moving around or everyone is actively participating, such as an ice breaker game but should be related to topic || 1 || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students transitioning/moving from one place to another (assuming it's a controlled transition) || .25 (everyone is participating but not engaged in content) ||  ||   ||
 * // Special Notes About Group Work: // || If presenters are talking to themselves and/or not interacting with/ observing/ assisting/ assessing students, engagement usually decreases pretty quickly and the 1.0 can drop || • If students are in groups that have all been assigned the same thing but there's a mix of activity going on in the groups (e.g., some are still reading while others have already started the assigned creative project), I will usually go with the higher score of the two.
 * GROUP PRESENTATIONS || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Students explaining / showing to the whole class a product they created (for example a skit or poster) || .5 (the students presenting are 100% engaged, but the rest of the class is passive . . . this number should really be a % representing the number of students presenting, but let's be generous) || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students explaining / showing to the whole class a technology product they created || .5 (see above) || * .5 if they used technology in a Type I way to create their product,
 * 1 if they used technology in a Type II way (even if the presentation itself isn't Type II) || 0 ||
 * Students explaining / showing to the whole class a product they created and presenters have given the audience members guidance on what to watch for || 1 || (see above entries--depends if they used it and how) || 0 ||
 * WATCHING VIDEO/LISTENING TO AUDIO/VIEWING COMIC LIFE (whether as a class on the big screen, in small groups, or as individuals) || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Students watching an engaging video or listening to an engaging audio presentation created by the presentation team or reading/watching a Comic Life created by the presentation team that is related to content

(NOTE: if students are reading the Comic Life (you're not reading it to them) but they don't have control over the pace, you might lose .25 engagement points if some students become disengaged waiting for the next page or lose interest because the pages turned too quickly.) || .75 (they're actually pretty passive, but you get bonus points for making your own product) || 0 (as described in the Observation Tool--either the students or the teacher get the points but not both) || .75

If you made a Comic Life and students are reading it on paper, it's still .75 for technology ||
 * Students watching an engaging video or listening to an engaging audio presentation created by the presentation team or watching a Comic Life created by the presentation team with presenters "acting out" or reading aloud the Comic Life (related to content), AND filling out a graphic organizer or doing something else that gives them direction and purpose for watching the video || 1 (100% engagement) || 0 (same as above) || .75 (same as above) ||
 * Students watching an engaging video or listening to an engaging audio presentation NOT created by the presentation team but that is related to content || .5 || 0 || .25 (Type I/passive) ||
 * Students watching an engaging video or listening to an engaging audio presentation related to content NOT created by the presentation team, filling out a graphic organizer or doing something else that gives them direction and purpose for watching the video || .75 || 0 || .25 ||
 * STUDENTS READING MATERIAL || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Students reading material about the content on the computer screen || .5 (students are passive but hopefully interacting with the content) || 0 if it's just pure text (just because it's on a computer screen doesn't mean the students are *using*) technology

.5 if there are graphics on the screen (see above for video) and the students are making choices, clicking on items appropriately, etc. || .25 if the text being read was created by the presenters ||
 * Students reading material about the content on a piece of paper || .5 (students are passive but hopefully interacting with the content) || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students reading material about the content while filling out a graphic organizer or doing something that gives them direction and purpose for doing the reading || 1 || 0 if it's pure text on a computer screen or piece of paper

.5 if there are graphics on the screen, audio links, hyperlinks that they are required to click on, etc. || 0 ||
 * PRESENTER SKIT/PRESENTATIONS ||  ||   ||   ||
 * Students watching a skit about the content put on by the presenters (but that doesn't involve technology) || .75 || 0 || 0 ||
 * Students participating in a skit about the content put on by the presenters (but that doesn't involve technology) || 1 || 0 || 0 ||
 * MISCELLANEOUS OBSERVATIONS || ===Engagement Score=== || ===Student Technology Score=== || ===Teacher/Presenter Technology Score=== ||
 * Presenter has something on the screen (a timer, the directions, a reference) while students are using other computers to do work OR students are engaged in group work || n/a || (determined by the student activity) || .25 (Type I/passive) for the first 2 minutes, after that 0 (students aren't watching the screen the whole time...they either reference it early on and then stop or just look up occasionally) ||
 * When there's an active mixture of watching/reading on the computer and small group discussion all happening fairly simultaneously || 1 || see above for video / reading || see above for video / reading ||
 * Presenter showing something on computer that students created for homework || 1 (because content is student generated) ||  || .25 (presenter is just showing it so it's probably a Type I usage in the moment) ||

__Some thoughts to consider as you design your Presentation__

 * __Engagement__
 * 1) Is the teacher covering the material or are the students uncovering the material? Students uncovering the material is more engaging AND more effective.
 * 2) What's the difference between the students' being engaged (actively interacting with the content) and the students' paying attention?
 * 3) Entertainment definitely increases the attention factor. How can you use entertainment to engage students (actively interacting with the content while paying attention) and not just have them pay better attention while being passive?
 * __Technology__
 * 1) What are the pros and cons of: writing down responses on the board vs. writing down responses on a Word document projected on the screen vs. writing down responses on a wiki projected on the screen?
 * __Cooperative Learning Strategies__
 * 1) What's the difference between putting into groups and cooperative learning strategies?
 * 2) What are the pros and cons of letting students pick their own teams?
 * 3) How long should it take to get into groups and how can you make the most efficient use of that time?