The use of Guided Group Inquiry (GGI) to facilitate students achieving the Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) of Work based learning Principal Investigator:

The use of Guided Group Inquiry (GGI) to facilitate students achieving the

Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) of Work based learning

Principal Investigator: Dr Chan Yue-kuen Estella Co-Investigators: Ms Frances Wai-hing Leung Mr Simon Wu Mr Joannes Lee Dr. Phoebe TsoiTeaching Development Grant – Sharing session

10 Dec 2008TDG Project No. 6000137 PI: Dr Chan Yue-kuen (SS)

Background

• Work based learning / ILOs• Guided Group Inquiry (GGI)

2 x 2 hours inquiry group Facilitated by instructors

• Inquiry based group learning• Semi-structured / instructor led

TDG Project No. 6000137 PI: Dr Chan Yue-kuen (SS)

Our Team (SS)

• Principal Investigator: Dr Chan Yue-kuen Estella

• Co-Investigator(s):Ms Frances Wai-hing Leung, Mr Simon Wu, Mr Joannes Lee, and Dr. Phoebe Tsoi (who resigned but remained on the team)


The ILOs

• One of the major themes – to become a reflective professional

• E.g. taking greater control and responsibility for their own learning in this practicum

• formulating generalizations and abstractions

• ……. • DEEP LEARNING?


Our curiosities ?

• Teaching requires a degree of curiosity !

• What works and what does not? • How to make the best use of these

GGIs ?• And how to achieve deep learning?


How do we understand GGI

• Inquiry based vs problem based• No fixed answer ???• A space for inquiry !!!!• Students take charge with teacher’s

guidance • Time limited


Research Methods

• More than 10 sessions of guided group inquiry (GGI) were conducted, recorded and transcribed

• Two focus groups were conducted to collect comments from students

• After attending each GGI session, students were requested to write up an reflective report on their learning


Coding system

• A coding system was developed to analyze the massive data on the verbal interactions collected from video-tapes of 9 GGI sessions, based on a coding system of a process study in analyzing verbal interactions in tutorial groups


Preliminary findings – Group A

• 5 students• Setting specific• Orientating questions from 33%(44) to 29% (86)• Exploratory questions from 23% (31) to 27% (89)• Discovery questions from 15% (20) to 5% (16)• Cumulative questions from 17% (22) to 16% (47)• Reflective statement from 7% (9) to 14 % (42) • Major contribution from Instructor – Exploratory

questions 68% (21) to 53% (42)


Group A

• Substantial increase in the proportion of their reflective statements in the second session (from 9 to 42 )

• What induced the change?


Preliminary findings – Group B

• 3 students• Setting specific• Orientating questions from 95%(60) to 100% (64)• Exploratory questions from 68% (43) to 76% (25)• Discovery questions from 100% (30) to 32% (16)• Cumulative questions from 100% (108) to 100%

(52)• Reflective statement from 7% (9) to 14 % (42) • Major contribution from Instructor – Procedural

statements 100% (21) to 63 % (42)


Preliminary findings – Group F

• 7 Students • Subject specific• Orientating questions from 88%(107) to 88%

(73)• Exploratory questions from 28% (22) to 31%

(19)• Discovery questions from 71% (12) to 89% (24)• Cumulative questions from 100% (1) to 0% (0)• Reflective statement from 0% (0) to 100 % (19) • Major contribution from Instructor – Exploratory

statements 72% (56) to 69 % (42)


Reflective statements

• there a substantial increase in the proportion of their reflective statements in the second session

• For Group A, from 9 to 42• For Group B, from 9 to 42 • For Group F, from 0 to 19• Does that imply a higher level of

learning?


Platform for diversity Theory 0 0 0 2

Client 1 4 1 4

Colleagues/supervisor 0 2 0 4

Practice 6 4 4 13

Social welfare policy 0 0 0 1

Agency/service delivery 0 3 1 4

Staff role 0 3 1 4

Professional role 1 5 1 4

Ethical 0 1 0 0

Others 0 4 0 0

Total 8 26 8 36


The teachers’ teaching roles in GGI

• Overall speaking, exploratory questions and statements, including open question/statement, critical question/statement and verification question/statement were important communicative activities for the instructor in subject based as well as setting based sessions in order to facilitate the GGI process.


Selective feedbacks from students

• “….from the process, I can listen different ways about how to deal with the different situation from different students. Some of the opinions and the situations were I never thought it. It can prepare me to have psychological preparation to face the similar problems. During discussion, I also can think critically about the possible ways to solve the situation that classmates raised. It provides a space for me to think”. Student A

• “I think what I have learnt most is to view an event from another perspective, and to have self-reflection on more levels. Student B


Our next questions

• What kinds of students would benefit most from GGI?

• How about cultural difference? • What sort of learning would that the

form of teaching and learning be best for?

• How to manage student’s expectation?


3 S - Clues for teachers?

• Structure - providing procedural and exploratory statements

• Space – keep my mouth shut

• Safety – provide supports and allow for diversity

Thanks for Your listening

and participation


Documents

The use of Guided Group Inquiry (GGI) to facilitate students achieving the Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) of Work based learning Principal Investigator: