# data[].attributes.body
•In order to get my students getting motivated in my subject teaching, I decided to engage them more and have to analyse my practice.

•For the purpose, I have chosen ‘Brookfield’s Four Lenses Reflection Model’ .

Following this model, following steps have been adopted by me:

1)‘Written and oral feedbacks’ have been taken from the students concerns and their suggestions have also been considered.

2)‘Peering tutoring sessions’ have also been conducted, where other tutors (including my mentor) have physically attended my class on the subject.

3)Further ‘action plans’ will be prepared for betterment in teaching practices in future to motivate the students of level 7 of such theoretical/conceptual subjects.

4) Students have been planned to be motivated through feedback and assessments also.

# data[].attributes.body
During initial classes, it was found that the students could not be answer tthe questions asked from the lessons taught. Even a sense of reluctance was prevalent there. I realised an immediate need for intervention to improve the situation by some means.

# data[].attributes.body
•Problem based learning (PBL)  is a constructivist pedagogy

•Problem based learning enables the students to embrace complexity, find relevance and joy in their learning.

•Problem based learning embrace their capacity for responsible real world problem solving and hence can motivate them to learn.

( Ram et. al, 2005)
&
constructivism/constructivist theory, where people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world through experiencing  things and reflecting on those experiences. (Christie, 2005).

# data[].attributes.body
It is about the student motivation in understanding and learning theoretical subjects such as Organisational Behaviour (ATHE Level 7 Unit 7.4). It is found that students are not felt motivated or engaged in learning with such a subject with many theories etc. As many of them are already working and have rejoined the programme after a long gap of 3 or 4 years, it has remained difficult for them to remember and understand so many theories and concepts of the paper.
1. What additional support or information or guidance they require ?
Ans. They are now being provided additional time and additional teaching techniques for support and guidance, where the learners and tutor interact regularly to discuss the topics and clear student doubts.  For the same, the students are being additionally taught and guided with case studies (class discussions and problem solving), video displays etc. this ATHE Level 7 class is scheduled on every Friday. The class is completed by approx. 11.45 AM everyday. All the students have been advised to meet me at the classroom or at my office with any doubt or any clarification regarding any subject area, covered till then. Though, it is a small batch, most of the students regularly meet me at my office with such doubts and any assignment related difficulty, they face. Today, I had a class and their submission deadline is fast approaching. Today's entire class has been spent on checking and guiding individual student's draft assignment works at the class. In previous modules, students have sent me the softcopies by mail and I have checked their works on plagscan and sent them the feedback. Even, anybody found with highly plagiarised work have been guided in the class and outside. There are examples, where their work quality have improved and plagiarism levels have come down. Sir, during the present semester, they will start sending their full draft assignments for preliminary checking and plagscan checking too.

2. How their understanding of the scenario is being improved?
Ans. The same can be improved by pro-active experiential learning by incorporating more video presentation on specific topics, discussion of case studies in the class, conducting problem solution sessions as the part of regular practices. Such initiatives have been recorded in the CDM (course delivery manual). Improvement of their understanding of the subject is clearly visible with their response patterns, their interests to join discussions etc. Till now local employees are not involved in developing cases. I have mapped this aspect in CDM (Course Delivery Manual) for implementation from next semester. I selectively choose cases from different text books like Stephen P Robbins (Introduction to Organisation Behaviour) etc. Apart from that I have personally subscribed to Harvard Case Publishing to get more practical cases. We have recently discussed an Harvard case on 'J P Morgan Stanley's 360 degree feedback system' as a part of student learning on organisational culture and structure. The case is available with me and can be attached as evidence. Some of the students are also working and we have discussed their employment related issues as live examples for understanding few aspects of Organisation Behaviour with their permission.

3.  Anything further is planned?
Ans. Following are being planned
i) More and more live examples to be given to them

ii) Encouraging them to participate in debates and class discussions

iii)  Increasing interactions.

iv)  Mapping more cases for particular issues.

# data[].attributes.body
Taxonomies of learning have become popular and relevant in education, since the education practices have moved to learning outcomes based approach. The main objective of such evolution is to ensure curriculum designs to transform from more teacher-centered learning (content dominant) to more student centered learning. Moreover, such initiatives of identifying learning outcomes can enable both the treacher and learner to clearly identify what a learner is expected to have achieved or have made progress towards towards achieving on completion of a module. Learning taxonomies or classifications are commonly utilised as the way to describe different kinds of learning behaviours and characteristics those the teachers wish their students should develop. They are often used to identify different stages of learning development and thus provide a useful tool in distinguishing the appropriateness of particular learning outcomes for particular module levels. The most common and earliest of these is Bloom's taxonomy, which has been modified by Anderson and others in 2001. The original Bloom's taxonomy (1956), was undoubtedly a pioneering initiative in this regard. However, the same was more of content dominant or teacher centered-dominant, where knowledge remained the main area of exploration. According to this model, six subsequent steps were discussed such as knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. However, to overcome, the shortcomings as mentioned before, a group of cognitive psychologists, curriculum theorists, instructional researchers, testing and assessment specialists published (2001) a revised version of Bloom's taxonomy. The authors of the revised taxonomy presented the higher dynamism of the old classification. They used verbs and gerunds to level their categories or sub-categories, rather than nouns of the original taxonomy. The revised Bloom's taxonomy seems to be more practical and relevant for the same reason. These action words/verbs describe the cognitive processes by which thinkers encounter and work with knowledge. These action words/verbs have been classified as follows. Remembering (recognising/recalling), Understanding(interpreting/exemplifying/classifying/summarising/inferring/comparing/explaining), Applying (executing), Analyzing (differentiating/organizing/attributing), Evaluating (checking/ critiquing), Creating (Generating/planning/producing). However, a separate taxonomy of the types of knowledge used in cognition has also been created along with the previous one. These are factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, proceedural knowledge, Meta-cognitive knowledge. The authors of the revised Bloom's taxonomy have suggested a multi-layer answer regarding the use of the same as setting the objectives (learning outcomes), benefits of the teachers of using frameworks to attain these objectives. Undoubtedly, this is one of the most sought after taxonomies. However, to me Bloom's revised taxonomy seems to more complicated to practice. I liked SOLO taxonomy for it's more simple framework to use in higher education. SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy. It's more important contribution is that it's ability to support writing learning outcomes and to set the learning agenda accordingly. Propagated by Boulton-Lewis (1994), it has been the one of the most popular approaches. Based on five subsequent levels (pre-structural, uni-structural, multi-structural, relational and extended-abstract), it helps the tutor to prepare the learning and evaluation strategy for the different target learner groups such as incompetent to expertise. Fink's taxonomy is not hierarchical like previous two taxonomies. In addition it attempts to cover a broader cross-section of domains (Functional knowledge, application, integration, human dimensions, caring and learning to learn) . However, the psycho-motor domain is absent here. A similarity between Fink's taxonomy and Anderson's taxonomy is also found. Both have given emphasis on meta-cognition (learn to learn). This model is also a preferred model to many for incorporating few new aspects, which is not visible in any previous models. These new aspects are 'human dimensions (learning about and changing oneself's, understanding and interacting with others), caring (identifying and changing one's feelings, interests and values). It can be concluded that since 1950s-1970s till recent times, the taxonomies have evolved through four stages. During 1950s, we can see the emergence of Cognitive  (Bloom et. al.), affective  by Bloom et al. and Krathwohl et al. and Psycho-motor model (Bloom, Simpson, Dave etc.). During  1980s, SOLO taxonomy (by Biggs and Collins) came into existence. During 1990s, Bloom's taxonomy was modified by Anderson et al by adding cognitive process aspects and finally, by adding the aspects like caring and learning about oneself, Fink's taxonomy came into forefront in 2000. It can also be said that most of the studies on taxonomy have remained focused on meta-cognitive dimensions at different levels.

# data[].attributes.headline
Learning styles and the learning style I prefer to adopt

# data[].attributes.subject
Learning styles and the learning style I prefer to adopt

# data[].attributes.body
This Becta introduction to the research literature on learning styles considers some definitions and the elements of learning style – information processing, instructional preferences and learning strategies.  The term ‘learning styles’ has no one definition – in much of the literature it is used loosely and often interchangeably with terms such as ‘thinking styles’, ‘cognitive styles’ and ‘learning modalities’. Research in the field of learning styles is conflicting and often methodologically flawed. The literature draws on the fields of pedagogy, psychology and neuroscience, but generally fails to engage fully with any of them. However,  a number of researchers (for example Cassidy 2004) have attempted to break down the concepts and processes which underlie the term ‘learning styles’. Although there is a danger of oversimplifying a complex subject, learning styles may be said to consist of three inter-related elements: • information processing – habitual modes of perceiving, storing and organising information (for example pictorially or verbally) • instructional preferences – predispositions towards learning in a certain way (such as collaboratively or independently) or in a certain setting (environment or time of day, for instance) • learning strategies – adaptive responses to learning specific subject matter in a particular context.
Following are the 13 most popular learning models ( Coffield et al 2004).
1)  Gregorc – Mind Styles Delineator
2)  Dunn and Dunn – Learning Styles Questionnaire/Inventory
3)  Riding – Cognitive Styles Analysis
4)  Myers-Briggs – Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
5)   Apter – Motivational Style Profile
6)  Jackson – Learning Styles Profiler
7) Kolb – Learning Styles Inventory
8)  Honey and Mumford – Learning Styles Questionnaire
9)  Herrmann – Brain Dominance Instrument
10)  Allinson and Hayes – Cognitive Styles Index
11)  Entwistle – Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST)
12)  Vermunt – Inventory of Learning Styles
13)  Sternberg – Thinking Styles
However, the preferred learning style for me will be Kolb's learning Style. This is because of it's nature of continuum from concrete experience to active experimentation. The modules, I am teaching and the issues of motivation of my students in learning to study the theoretical subjects such as Organisational Behaviour has the enough opportunity by applying this continuum based on experiential learning practice. In teaching other modules also, the same can be applied.

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching strategies or teaching approaches either refer to loosely defined pedagogic methods, teaching styles etc. or to more precisely formulated instructional design models (not methods, i.e. models in the sense of instructional systems design).
Often, pedagogic strategies are discussed and defined with respect to general learning theoretical concepts e.g., behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivim, socio- constructivism, situational learning etc.  However, it should be clear that a learning theorectical stance doesn't imply a given pedagogical model of the same kind. E.g. one may strongly believe that knowledge must be constructed (psychology) but can adopt an instructional/cognitivist teaching approach.

Joyce, Weil and Calhoun (2000) defined 4 major families of models for teaching, i.e. strategies that are used in schooling. Behavioral systems family of models, Information-processing family of models, Personal family of models, and Social family of models. I have adopted constructivism strategy to teach my modules, where learners are encouraged to learn through experiences of cases, simulations, problem solving etc.

# data[].attributes.body
A mind map is a visual representation of hierarchical information that includes a central idea surrounded by connected branches of associated topics. Mind Mapping, a graphic technique developed by Tony Buzan in the late 1960s and early 1970s to improve note-taking, to enhance memory and problem-solving, to encourage creativity, to organize thinking, and to develop ideas and concepts, was explored in two S2 classrooms as a pedagogical tool for enhancing history education. In the present scenario mind mapping has been done accordingly.
In my scenario, I have identified following areas of mind mapping. At the centre of all, I have kept my learners as my teaching initiatives will be for them only.

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching demography is appropriate for all ages depending on how lessons are designed and concrete information is provided. According to Crews, it is expected at the college level that few of the faculties or tutors have a grasp of the effective teaching from adult and experienced student population, though it is highly desirable in most of the cases. The same study has shown how such student population can be taught by different approaches such as giving emphasis on linking the theoretical abstracts with realities, using activities which are equally appealing to all the learners etc..  Another aspect the study highlighted has been the diverse population, from different social, ethnic, educational, professional and age backgrounds. In the present case, all the students have bachelors level degrees with work experience from 2-15 years. The learners are also found from different ethnic backgrounds and nationalities In such case teaching theories can be challenging. Here, the tutor is attempting to consult the adult learners to understand their specific needs, to prepare a specific mind map for respective level teaching etc. Mind mapping is required to give the learners a broader picture of the subject and how different aspects of such subject are interrelated. This can help them to overcome the sensory isolation of different concepts and theories.

# data[].attributes.body
As discussed and briefed in the previous blog (Blog 1), the min challenge I am facing is motivating students in learning theoretical subjects, mainly the subject, I am teaching this semester with ATHE level 7 students, Organisational Behaviour. One of the most difficult things for students is learning about theory. Teaching and learning theory delights theory-headed people, but it can drain others, and it can cause students to shut down quickly if they don’t have the necessary skills. If we don’t teach students to read theory critically (Cranton, 2016). It is also suggested that mainly for the working professional students or those, who have been disassociated from academic practices for long time or other experiential classes, teaching theories without relating back to the examples may casuse the risk of deskilling the students as they are also learning critical thinking aspects too. Therefore, it remains a major challenge not only to teach theory based subjects to the adults, but also to make such concepts imbibed in their senses.