1 / 20

Comparison of authentic assignments with project based assignments

Comparison of authentic assignments with project based assignments. Ann Brown, Martin Rich and Clive Holtham, Cass Business School BMAF 2010 Conference – April 2010. Session Aims and approach. All attendees – please join a group of not more than 4 AIMS

jensen
Download Presentation

Comparison of authentic assignments with project based assignments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of authentic assignments with project based assignments Ann Brown, Martin Rich and Clive Holtham, Cass Business School BMAF 2010 Conference – April 2010

  2. Session Aims and approach All attendees – please join a group of not more than 4 AIMS • Various types of ‘authentic’ student based activity assignments – Fitting the choice to learning aims and context? (Question 1) • Review the experience of a team based project for one Cass module assignment – design improvements? (Question 2) APPROACH • Brief contribution from the presenters • Groups to discuss 2 questions • Plenary sessions to pool results

  3. Cass experience: Dealing with First year Transition problems for undergraduates • Additional tutorial support for many 1st year core modules; pre sessional courses • Development of many differing types of student feedback channels • Development of Student based activity assignments • Practice of Management (PofM; 1st year) - staff designed team exercises • Systems Thinking for Consultants (3rd year) - team consultancy exercise for live clients around the University and for alumni organisations

  4. Fidelity Matrix Exceptional Nature of real-life event being simulated Routine Emulated Reality Simulated Reality Practice Reality Live Reality Extent of Fidelity to real-life

  5. To assume falsely the appearance or signs of ; to feign, pretend, counterfeit, imitate; to profess or suggest falsely. To have the external features of, to present a strong resemblance to To imitate the conditions or behaviour of.. by means of a model, esp. for the purpose of study or of training To strive to equal or rival; to copy or imitate with the object of equalling or excelling. Implying some degree of success: To vie with, rival, attain or approach to equality with Computing. To reproduce the action of or behave like with the aid of hardware or software Emulate Simulate

  6. The Longmoor Military Railway

  7. Objective Standardised Clinical Examination (OSCE)

  8. Markstrat

  9. Ardcalloch

  10. Exceptional Dean’s Dilemma Bank of Ruritania Nature of real-life event being simulated Poland Consultancy Project Strategy Project Markstrat Routine Emulated Reality Simulated Reality Practice Reality Live Reality Cass Examples Extent of Fidelity to real-life

  11. Exceptional Systems thinking for consultants Nature of real-life event being simulated PofM: Team ex. 2 City Institutions PofM: self assessment PofM: team ex 3 PofM: Team ex 1 team creation Routine Emulated Reality Simulated Reality Practice Reality Live Reality Case modules Extent of Fidelity to real-life

  12. Question 1 What are the strengths and weaknesses of using each of these types of assignment? For what types of modules would you use each of these types of assignment and why?

  13. Practice of Management Educational aims • Connect management academic theory to practice • Interdependence of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ tools • Introduce high-engagement constructivist learning methods Teaching approach • Lectures on management theory; 3 team assignments; 2 individual assignments; use of class time for team work (with tutors), assignment briefing, feedback on assignment results Results of last 2 years –student response positive but comments include demanding in time; understanding what is required not clear, team assignment 3 not understood

  14. Practice of Management – team assignment 3 Builds on Individual assignment 2 in which all students given 1 individual management writer (guru) to research in depth and write up; required a short report and a Pokeman card using all types of presentation tools to distil essence of the guru. (examples on next slides) Mechanics of the exercise • Briefing (1/2 of previous session) • 1 session for team to create poster answering the question posed at the start of the session; presentation (2”); tutor response Task posed at briefing • Present a synthesis on a poster - of the work and views of your team’s management writers which you researched for individual guru assignment 2

  15. Practice of Management – team assignment 3 2009 Learning Aims of the assignment • Practice in working as a team under time pressure • Learning from each other • Building on individual assignment 2 to develop their knowledge in theory of management Question set 2009 • The Board is the BP global board. Your team is asked to explain/show the board how your group of management thinkers/writers/practioners would approach analysing BP's current situation (internal & external).

  16. Question 2 What would you advise? Do something completely different; modify (How?) Where does this fit on the Fidelity matrix?

More Related