STATEMENT EVIDENCE
Statement Evidence Appendices
Artefact 1. NYU Sydney mid-term student evaluations (comments only)
Artefact 2. NYU Sydney sample lecture slides (including student-centred learning activity)
Artefact 3. UNDA peer review of Capstone C: (Creative) Research Project (reviewed by Head of Program)
Artefact 4. UNDA Capstone D: (Creative) Research Project (including exegesis) Grading Criteria
Artefact 5. Example of technology enhanced learning and teaching in creative writing
Statement Evidence Appendices
Artefact 1. NYU Sydney mid-term student evaluations (comments only)
Artefact 2. NYU Sydney sample lecture slides (including student-centred learning activity)
Artefact 3. UNDA peer review of Capstone C: (Creative) Research Project (reviewed by Head of Program)
Artefact 4. UNDA Capstone D: (Creative) Research Project (including exegesis) Grading Criteria
Artefact 5. Example of technology enhanced learning and teaching in creative writing
Artefact 1: NYU Sydney mid-term student evaluations (comments only)
Artefact 2: NYU Sydney sample lecture slides (including student-centred learning activity)
Artefact 3: UNDA peer review of Capstone C: Research Project (reviewed by Head of Program)
Artefact 4: UNDA Capstone D: (Creative) Research Project (including exegesis) Grading Criteria
Artefact 5: Example of technology enhanced learning and teaching in creative writing
Creative Writing TEL: A Vision
“Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment”
3000-4000 words (1000 per student)
Weighted 35%
“Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment’ is both a formative and a summative TEL assessment task in “Literary Trauma Testimony”, an undergraduate 3rd-year creative writing course. The group work takes place in a “flipped classroom” where “events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa” (Lage et al., 2000, p. 32). Students read the weekly set readings at home and respond to one reading in an online Reading Journal (the “Reading Response’ is another summative task, weighted at 20%) and participate in an online interactive lecture. The lecture is delivered in 15 min pods; in between each pods students are encouraged to note questions and talking points to bring to class or to write a passage in an online Reflective Journal (this is not an assessable task, but students are asked to share reflections on lecture content in class). The flipped learning enables focus on discussion, student-centred learning activities, and workshopping of student work in progress during class time.
In groups of three or four, students’ work on the “Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment” in class over the period of several weeks source “found” material online (reportage, archival, literary etc.) and create an online text about or responding to a traumatic 21st-century historic event (of their own choosing). Students will create a multi-authored, intertextual, multimodal, and referenced (acknowledging texts engaged with) creative work including sections of (colour coded) individual writing. Students intervene in or build on, texts to generate original work on a shared Medium page.
My envisioned TEL environment also promotes the evidence-based practice of summative self and peer-assessment. Time in the first two weeks of the semester is devoted to developing grading criteria in collaboration with students well in advance of summative task commencement. This is evidenced good practice as it encourages students to take ownership of their learning, increases student motivation and engagement, enhances student focus on understanding criteria and standards, and creates a sense of scholarly community (Nulty, n.d. p. 3). It also supports the development of self-assessment and critical skills crucial to success in the creative writing context.
TEQSA defines TEL as “any learning that occurs through the application of electronic communications and computer-based educational technology, combined with pedagogical principles and practices that are applicable to and tailored for this purpose” (2017, p. 1). Significant adoption of TEL beyond online assessment submission and blog-based tasks is uncommon in creative writing, and the onus is on the development of individual writing practice. Jodi Nicotra (2009) states that “habituated ways of thinking about and teaching writing” (p. W274) fail to encompass the dynamic and multi-authored writing appearing in the digital realm. One of the main goals of this task is to redress that. Technology shapes new modes of writing rather than merely mediating it, presenting new opportunities and challenges for both creative writing and creative writing pedagogy. The task targets “Does”: the highest level of Miller’s Pyramid in the original model (Mrozek, 2014) in requiring performance integrated into practice. “Does” corresponds to “Creating” and “Evaluating” as the highest levels in Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy (TeachThought Staff 2017), requiring higher-order skills such as experimenting, collaborating, and constructing. In my adaptation of Miller’s Pyramid to the creative writing context, the “Does” pyramid apex represents the achievement of a degree of mastery.
This task design addresses all of Chickering’s seven vectors of identity development (Chickering, 1969), including the highest vector, “Developing Integrity” due to its heightened stakes regarding academic integrity (I address this further below). It relates to several of Knowles’ six principles of adult learning (Knowles et al., 2014). The self-directed nature of the task supports existing learner self-concept, and it is problem-centred as advocated by Knowles for adult learning (requiring students to find a creative way of writing trauma through engagement with existing representations). The task involves all three of the essential elements for learning in the Community of Inquiry Model: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence (Garrison et al., 2000).
Academic integrity is a limitation and significant concern with a task of this nature. The challenge is facilitating student exploration and practice of intertextual writing, an established modernist and postmodernist literary mode, in a 21st-century TEL context, while maintaining adherence to academic and artistic integrity and institutional policy. The standard use of Turnitin would not prove useful in this case because the task involves working with “found” text sourced online in the creation of a new and potentially multimodal Medium digital-born text. Thorough instruction and supervision is, therefore, crucial.
I facilitate learning around intertextuality in such a way as to highlight that while all writing is intertextual in that new writing is always informed by existing writing, intellectual property is subject to copyright law and to referencing requirements and furthermore that students are working within a tertiary context guided by academic integrity policy. Correct academic and artistic conduct is defined, and misconduct is addressed as part of a detailed task brief, both in the course Outline and in class, with expectations regarding referencing stated. Academic integrity is included as a non-negotiable grading criterion for peer assessment, which means students would be holding each other accountable (which in turn reinforces their accountability). Students working in groups during class enables instructor supervision of the production process via direct observation and engagements with students as they work.
This item of evidence features assessment task design that shows leadership in recognising the value of including options for instructor-student negotiation regarding assessment tasks (Morris & Stommel 2017: Stommel 2017). It takes into account research supporting summative peer assessment (Boud 1995; Nulty n.d.), which relates to my TPS claim to attentiveness regarding the affective and social and relational aspects of learning and teaching informed by Kolb’s experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984). Continued teacher support of the student peer-assessment process, as recommended (Nulty, n.d. pp. 10-11), is vital throughout in this scenario, and it is achievable since criteria development and group work takes place in the context of the classroom. I final mark (confirming or adjusting) peer review efforts and also cross-mark with a peer instructor.
“Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment”
3000-4000 words (1000 per student)
Weighted 35%
“Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment’ is both a formative and a summative TEL assessment task in “Literary Trauma Testimony”, an undergraduate 3rd-year creative writing course. The group work takes place in a “flipped classroom” where “events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa” (Lage et al., 2000, p. 32). Students read the weekly set readings at home and respond to one reading in an online Reading Journal (the “Reading Response’ is another summative task, weighted at 20%) and participate in an online interactive lecture. The lecture is delivered in 15 min pods; in between each pods students are encouraged to note questions and talking points to bring to class or to write a passage in an online Reflective Journal (this is not an assessable task, but students are asked to share reflections on lecture content in class). The flipped learning enables focus on discussion, student-centred learning activities, and workshopping of student work in progress during class time.
In groups of three or four, students’ work on the “Digital Poetics Hybrid Experiment” in class over the period of several weeks source “found” material online (reportage, archival, literary etc.) and create an online text about or responding to a traumatic 21st-century historic event (of their own choosing). Students will create a multi-authored, intertextual, multimodal, and referenced (acknowledging texts engaged with) creative work including sections of (colour coded) individual writing. Students intervene in or build on, texts to generate original work on a shared Medium page.
My envisioned TEL environment also promotes the evidence-based practice of summative self and peer-assessment. Time in the first two weeks of the semester is devoted to developing grading criteria in collaboration with students well in advance of summative task commencement. This is evidenced good practice as it encourages students to take ownership of their learning, increases student motivation and engagement, enhances student focus on understanding criteria and standards, and creates a sense of scholarly community (Nulty, n.d. p. 3). It also supports the development of self-assessment and critical skills crucial to success in the creative writing context.
TEQSA defines TEL as “any learning that occurs through the application of electronic communications and computer-based educational technology, combined with pedagogical principles and practices that are applicable to and tailored for this purpose” (2017, p. 1). Significant adoption of TEL beyond online assessment submission and blog-based tasks is uncommon in creative writing, and the onus is on the development of individual writing practice. Jodi Nicotra (2009) states that “habituated ways of thinking about and teaching writing” (p. W274) fail to encompass the dynamic and multi-authored writing appearing in the digital realm. One of the main goals of this task is to redress that. Technology shapes new modes of writing rather than merely mediating it, presenting new opportunities and challenges for both creative writing and creative writing pedagogy. The task targets “Does”: the highest level of Miller’s Pyramid in the original model (Mrozek, 2014) in requiring performance integrated into practice. “Does” corresponds to “Creating” and “Evaluating” as the highest levels in Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy (TeachThought Staff 2017), requiring higher-order skills such as experimenting, collaborating, and constructing. In my adaptation of Miller’s Pyramid to the creative writing context, the “Does” pyramid apex represents the achievement of a degree of mastery.
This task design addresses all of Chickering’s seven vectors of identity development (Chickering, 1969), including the highest vector, “Developing Integrity” due to its heightened stakes regarding academic integrity (I address this further below). It relates to several of Knowles’ six principles of adult learning (Knowles et al., 2014). The self-directed nature of the task supports existing learner self-concept, and it is problem-centred as advocated by Knowles for adult learning (requiring students to find a creative way of writing trauma through engagement with existing representations). The task involves all three of the essential elements for learning in the Community of Inquiry Model: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence (Garrison et al., 2000).
Academic integrity is a limitation and significant concern with a task of this nature. The challenge is facilitating student exploration and practice of intertextual writing, an established modernist and postmodernist literary mode, in a 21st-century TEL context, while maintaining adherence to academic and artistic integrity and institutional policy. The standard use of Turnitin would not prove useful in this case because the task involves working with “found” text sourced online in the creation of a new and potentially multimodal Medium digital-born text. Thorough instruction and supervision is, therefore, crucial.
I facilitate learning around intertextuality in such a way as to highlight that while all writing is intertextual in that new writing is always informed by existing writing, intellectual property is subject to copyright law and to referencing requirements and furthermore that students are working within a tertiary context guided by academic integrity policy. Correct academic and artistic conduct is defined, and misconduct is addressed as part of a detailed task brief, both in the course Outline and in class, with expectations regarding referencing stated. Academic integrity is included as a non-negotiable grading criterion for peer assessment, which means students would be holding each other accountable (which in turn reinforces their accountability). Students working in groups during class enables instructor supervision of the production process via direct observation and engagements with students as they work.
This item of evidence features assessment task design that shows leadership in recognising the value of including options for instructor-student negotiation regarding assessment tasks (Morris & Stommel 2017: Stommel 2017). It takes into account research supporting summative peer assessment (Boud 1995; Nulty n.d.), which relates to my TPS claim to attentiveness regarding the affective and social and relational aspects of learning and teaching informed by Kolb’s experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984). Continued teacher support of the student peer-assessment process, as recommended (Nulty, n.d. pp. 10-11), is vital throughout in this scenario, and it is achievable since criteria development and group work takes place in the context of the classroom. I final mark (confirming or adjusting) peer review efforts and also cross-mark with a peer instructor.