• Post in your department's column

• Title your post with your name and session title (e.g., Jane Tan – Designing Learning for Enhanced Student Engagement)

• Use the three C–E–C subheadings in your post:

Connect

How does the information or ideas shared at the conference connect to what you already know or do in your teaching?

• What ideas resonated with your current practices or beliefs?

Extend

What new ideas or perspectives did you gain from the conference?

• What new ideas or strategies did you learn that you could apply in your teaching?

• How did today’s session build on or add to what you already knew?

Challenge

What is still challenging or puzzling? What questions do you have?

• What are you curious abut still?

• What would like more clarity on?

Extend:
From this Open Classroom experience, what I found worth learning from is the teacher's live demonstration. For instance, she went through a 10-minute video preparation process together with the students, recording her own key points on the whiteboard. This allowed students to observe how she organized and recorded her thoughts, helping them reflect on and improve their own learning processes.

Challenge:
In this lesson, the teacher could only have one student present, followed by a class-wide critique. How can we get more students to practice during lesson time? In comparison, one area where we are doing better is the use of AI tools, which allow more students to receive timely feedback.

Fei Yue is also provide various employment other than social workers, such as IT tech, administration and logistics.

There may be opportunities for our students to volunteer at the center such as conducting media workshops or collaboration on creating games or activities to engage our current youths.

Prof Manu posited that instruction that encourages productive failure fosters better conceptual understanding and transfer of knowledge than direct instruction.

Connect

• Making connections to prior knowledge

  • With limited working memory capacity, we can help students build its capacity when we tap on the prior knowledge that students have (e.g. easier to remember "Shakespeare writes plays" than "Nadiah writes plays") <-- sorry, it's a truncated example given

• Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

  • Students learn best when there is struggle

Extend

• 2 critical features of learning in the ZPD:

  • Provision of opportunities to fail - progressively make things harder for students until we see that they cannot do it

  • Minimising guidance to students - stusents will learn as long as the bulk of the cognitive/physical effort is on the learner without giving up

• A 2-phase design for Productive Failure in classroom

  • Problem-Solving (i.e. generation & exploration phase) first, then Instruction (i.e. consolidation & assembly phase)

  • Example: Adjustment of questions to achieve same outcome

    • Imagining this is a first lesson; instead of "Calculate the standard deviation of each striker.", ask "Invent as many ways for deciding who's the most consistent striker."

    • The latter question gives students the opportunity to feel the problem and activating of their prior knowledge. The former question doesn't facilitate the activation of prior knowledge since it only leaves students wondering what is standard deviation.

• An instruction with productive failure fosters adaptive thinking amongst students (I really like this idea :D)

  • When we intentionally design for failure, it forces students to be adaptive as they need to access their prior knowledge and adapt when they already know to new challenges.

  • Recap on adaptive thinking:

    • Understanding the variety of contexts, situations & environments one is exposed to

    • Managing complexity & ambiguity more confidently

Challenge

• The uncomfortable shift away from direct instruction (i.e. I do, we do, you do)

  • Direct instruction gives me the confidence that I have covered curriculum content because I have delivered it and demonstrated the different question types

  • Despite Prof Manu's research results that suggest that students are able to transfer their learning from a productive failure mode of instruction, it still leaves me feeling uncertain on whether our students are truly able to do it. I will need to think deeply about the alignment of my lesson obejctives/success criteria, how the lesson enactment looks like, and my modes of assessing learning.

  • Additionally, students & parents may be very used to direct instruction because they could see tangible success in their results, so they may not have the patience for failing ):

• I am curious in how to marry productive failure with feedback pedagogy.

  • How will feed up look like?

  • How could feed back be given?

  • How do I help students to feed forward?

lessons:

Connect : The speaker talked about asking good Maths questions. This is in line with my belief that when good questions are asked, they can spark off students' thinking. However, in my opinion, this also depends on the profile and proficiency level of the students.

Extend : The speaker talked about solving relevant problems before teaching the topic. This can be tried out as it may motivate students to learn about that topic and in turn improve their attention in class.

Challenge : Teachers can create an environment in class for CAIT. This may allow students to enjoy the lessons. To reconcile this environment with assessment is challenging. Teachers can provide such environment in class but how does this translate to assessment? Or how can this learning of CAIT be captured in assessment is a challenge. The speaker's view is to have the environment first and he has no concrete answers for assessment to capture CAIT yet.

Regarding scaffolding and the Zone of Proximal Development, as Prof Manu pointed out (and one which I took for granted), demonstrable failure gives us insight into the type of scaffolding we can provide to guide our learners. We should strive to provide minimal guidance (not to be confused with not giving guidance, but to provide that 'slight push') to elicit maximum cognitive effort from our students to ensure effective learning. At times, I am guilty of providing too much guidance, which in my opinion, takes away the opportunity for students to struggle, minimises their cognitive engagement, and more importantly, the opportunity for them to be adaptive and think critically.

(Extend): Prof Manu shared an example of a Productive Failure (PF) lesson comprising a two-phase design that could be implemented in our Math classes:

Phase 1 (Problem-Solving) Students are tasked to generate as many ways as possible to determine who is the most consistent striker based on their goal tallies over the years.

Phase 2 (Instruction) The Math teacher consolidates students' responses, provides formal introduction to the concept of Standard Deviation, and helps students see connections between their approaches and the concept they're learning. Linking back to Prof Manu's point on "Transferring", this creates an overlap between the Context of Learning and the Context of Use, helping students see the relevance in what they are learning.

(Challenge): The PF approach differs significantly from the Direct Instruction (DI) approach that our teachers are comfortable with.

• How could our teachers be better equipped with the relevant skills and knowledge to create PF lessons?

• I am curious to know if any school/department has tried out the PF approach and what are the impacts on both teachers and students?

Extend: What caught my attention was that cybersecurity specialists shared that they need to constantly attend courses every 6 months to upgrade their qualifications and ensure that their knowledge remains relevant. Their PD is done outside of work hours. This showed the need for resilience, a growth mindset and lifelong learning, since front-loading education is insufficient in a fast-paced industry. This was a good reminder that beyond knowledge acquisition, competencies and dispositions are necessary for our students not just in the future world of work, but even in industries today.

Challenge: The challenge is then how we can nurture our students to be ready for such a work environment, especially since front-loading education has been an accepted norm that our generation went through. Perhaps us attending TCEF and upgrading ourselves is a first step for us to role model the need for continuous education and the willingness to (re)learn and maybe even un-learn.

I was happy to reconnect with Dr Manu’s insightful work on Productive Failure (PF), which I was first introduced to 15 years ago when I was serving as a Subject Head for Physics in my second school. Back then, I made an early attempt to incorporate PF principles into our baseline resources, providing students with explicit opportunities to activate their prior knowledge and engage in collaborative discussions before formal instruction of new concepts. While it was heartening to see how this approach sparked curiosity and rich classroom conversations, it proved difficult to sustain as a routine. The demands of the O-Level syllabus meant that this process often took up more curriculum time than was available, and regrettably, I didn’t have the opportunity to formally evaluate its longer-term impact on student engagement and learning outcomes.

Extend

Revisiting this today, after so many years, has been a valuable moment of reflection on my own teaching practices since then. I noticed that over time — particularly during my third posting when COVID-19 and the shift to home-based and e-pedagogy took precedence, my efforts in intentionally applying PF principles waned. Today’s sharing, however, reignited deeper conversations around PF, especially within the larger context of developing adaptive thinking(e21CC) to help students thrive in an increasingly complex future. The strong, accumulated evidence supporting the benefits of PF in promoting deeper learning and resilience was a timely reminder of its relevance and potential in our classrooms today.

Challenge

Moving forward, several challenges stand in the way of implementing PF meaningfully:

1. Differentiating problems to match the diverse readiness levels of students and engaging them within their individual zones of proximal development (ZPD) is complex and resource-intensive.

2. Creating a psychologically safe learning environment for PF remains a delicate balancing act, particularly in the Asian cultural context where fear of failure, lower self-esteem, and concerns about losing face can hinder risk-taking. The challenge is in ensuring that productive struggle doesn’t inadvertently cross over into discouragement or shame for learners.

3. Finding sufficient time and space within an already packed curriculum to allow for the iterative tinkering, sense-making, and reflection inherent in PF is another practical constraints.

At the same time, there are exciting possibilities worth exploring:

1. The adoption of AI tools to personalise PF experiences could help better match problem tasks to students’ ZPD and support differentiated learning.

2. Teachers will need to evolve their roles as orchestrators of learning, integrating AI meaningfully to support PF while remaining the motivators and enculturators who cultivate the right mindsets for embracing struggle and failure as part of the learning process.

Doing so will better enable students to transfer and apply these adaptive skills beyond the classroom.

In the Secondary 2 (A) Chinese Language textbook, there is a unit on environmental protection, which includes a lesson on waste recycling. During the lesson, I referred to relevant materials to introduce students to the processes of waste collection, recycling, and disposal. This learning journey has provided me with a more detailed understanding of Singapore's waste recycling procedures, treatment processes, advantages, and challenges.

Extend:

From this learning journey, I learned that nearly half of Singapore's waste is treated through incineration, and the energy generated from this process can supply electricity to thousands of households. However, the harmful emissions produced during incineration remain unavoidable. This insight inspired me to emphasize the importance of waste recycling to my students during lessons.

Challenge:

This learning journey focused on studying Singapore's waste incineration methods but did not cover landfill disposal. I understand that half of Singapore's waste is managed through landfilling. I am very interested in this aspect, particularly in understanding the environmental impacts of landfill disposal and exploring whether there are better alternatives to replace landfilling.

• Students often perform well during lessons but struggle when questions are slightly changed.

• Scaffolding and understand the value of working within the Zone of Proximal Development. The idea of guiding students when tasks are harder is what we are all accustomed to.

• Teaching is not just about telling, it is about helping students see what they are not yet able to see. Teachers see differently from students as they lack background knowledge.

Extend

• Learning improves not just from correct answers but from struggle and failure, especially when students try before being told.

• Good explanations alone is not enough, students need to struggle first for deep learning to happen.

• Generation effect: students retain better when they try to generate answers (even wrong ones) before being taught.

• Productive failure should be designed intentionally during lesson.

• Timing for the guidance matter: “a time for telling” works best when students are stuck or confused.

• Play effect: giving students space to explore ideas creatively can strengthen understanding, instead of always guiding too much.

• Effective scaffolding involves gradually increasing support, not helping too early, which is what we usually do in our lessons.

• Productive failure can make learning more lasting by creating space for meaningful struggle and reflection.

• A two-phase design was shared:

  1. Problem-solving phase (deliberately challenging tasks where failure is likely to happen)

  2. Instruction phase (when teacher steps in to explain once students have struggled)

• The above flips the traditional order of instruction in our classes.

• Teachers not just delivers content, they are designers for domain knowledge, science of learning and thoughtful lesson design.

• AI can support this process by helping to generate, curate and personalise and even build lessons infused with productive failure principles.

Challenge

• How can I balance productive struggle/failure with syllabus coverage and time constraints?

• How do I create failure-based tasks that are still engaging and not discouraging?

• When does struggle for students become too much? How do I avoid overwhelming weaker students? Can i apply differentiated learning over here, only make the better ready students to struggle?

• How do I know if productive failure is really helping, what outcomes should I look for?

• How do I balance AI support with teacher intuition and classroom dynamics?

Extend:
One of the most useful takeaways from the session was the insight into how Class Companion can give teachers visibility over students’ writing processes, such as their typing time, pasted content, and number of attempts. These features could help me better understand students’ misconceptions and target support more effectively. I also learnt how GenAI can assist in generating assignments, which could save time and add variety to the writing tasks I set. The tool’s ability to support dispute resolution and allow teacher intervention adds a layer of accountability that I find reassuring. I’m now considering how I might incorporate this into selected writing activities, particularly in-class assignments where students can receive quick feedback and revise their work in real-time.

Challenge:
Nevertheless, I still have some questions and concerns. While the platform shows promise, its limitations, such as the lack of control over the AI feedback and its weaker performance in less specific tasks, make me cautious. In Literature especially, where interpretation and nuance are important, I wonder whether the AI feedback would be sensitive enough to assess students’ responses fairly. I’m also curious about how this tool could cater to mixed-ability learners, and whether the feedback can truly be personalised to meet each student where they are. I would be keen to see examples from other teachers who have used it effectively, and to understand how they’ve balanced its use with their own judgement and feedback practices.

Extend - The problem with failure is that it is often undesirable, whether by students or their parents as it has a negative connotation. Moving forward, there is a need to ensure that failure is safe, and that the tasks that are designed shouldn't always let the student succeed at the first try. This also helps build up resilience.

Challenge - PF design takes years to master. What are some concrete steps we can take to apply PF in the design of the curriculum?

This idea fits surprisingly well with our maker ethos. In many ways, we already value iteration, experimentation, and learning from mistakes. But Kapur’s research made me realise there’s a way to structure that process more intentionally to deepen learning outcomes.

His model involves two key phases. In Phase 1, learners are given a complex, open-ended challenge—something they haven’t been taught how to solve yet. The task is designed to be “just beyond” their current ability, forcing them to draw on what they know, collaborate, and try out different ideas. Failure is not just expected—it’s the point. Through the act of trying, they begin to surface what they do and don’t know.

Then comes Phase 2—instruction and consolidation. This is where we, as educators, step in to make the learning explicit. We help students reflect on what worked, what didn’t, and why. We connect their efforts to core concepts and techniques. In Kapur’s words, we help them “assemble” the knowledge that’s now ready to stick because they’ve experienced the need for it.

What’s exciting is that students who learn this way often show better long-term understanding and are more able to transfer their learning to new contexts. That’s exactly what we aim for in Maker Ed—skills that go beyond a single project or tool.

The talk reminded me that I don’t always have to give students the “how-to” up front. I can give them the challenge first—and let the questions, confusion, and collaboration lead the way. Then I can guide them in consolidating what they’ve discovered. It’s a mindset shift: from delivering knowledge to designing for curiosity, struggle, and reflection.

Moving forward, I’m planning to revisit how we frame our design briefs and scaffold reflection at the end of build sessions. Also driving the message to the students, it is okay to fail and to take a step back to let them realise the value of the struggling in the task is more valuable then the outcome. If done right, failure won’t just be a side effect of making—it’ll be a crucial part of learning and students will learn to periodically take a step back to assess on their own progress etc.

Extend- In Design and Technology lessons, it's essential to shift away from a culture of avoiding failure. We must create a safe space for students to take risks in their designs, even if it means breaking or failing in their initial attempts. Allowing students to experience failure can drive them to explore more creative solutions, build resilience, and develop the ability to learn from their mistakes.

Challenge - Perhaps it's time to design tasks or challenges that intentionally give students the time and space to fail, reflect, and grow. For example, we could provide all students with the same set of materials and ask them to create something functional. If their first attempt doesn’t work, they should be encouraged to analyze why it failed, conduct further research, and revise their design until it succeeds. This approach nurtures a mindset of learning through iteration, not just success.

Extend - I gained new ideas on how collaboration across departments, leveraging on the resources available internally, we can provide the opportunities for students to explore real-world challenges faced by individuals with disabilities and come up with creative solutions. For instance, the students of GuangYang Sec applied what they learnt in "Code for Fun" to create practical solutions for people with visual impairments. When they see the meaning and value in coding, it sparks their interest in learning more about coding.

Challenge - The presenters shared how much they were constantly reflecting on their teaching practices and personal beliefs. They played a facilitating role and relied a lot on incidental teachings. While the sessions were planned and structured, a lot of the students' ideas came during the interaction with individuals with Visual Impairments, as well as during the testing of products stage. This may be challenging, as there is a tight timeframe, and yet they had to be mindful to avoid a direct teaching approach but be attentive and capture the students' ideas or interests, and then offering them resources to expand on their ideas.

Data Visualisation refer to hit or heat map.

The use of heat maps (track their movement during game) are useful for students to find out their learning gaps and ways to close their learning gaps during the reflection or intervention.

Peer assessment using Hit Map for Badminton: use of padlet to capture student's learning and feedback given by their peers.

This is similar to what we are using for badminton.

Extend

Receptivity to Instructional Feedback (RIF)

-This is something new that I have learned. This is a good way to see if students are reception to feedback provided by peer and by teacher. As the results shown, students prefer teacher to give them feedback as compared to students as teachers are the domain expert. But students' feedback is still relevant for them to learn.

Challenge: In order for students to give good feedback, they need to be "taught" on how to use the hit or heat map properly and what feedback to give. As with all other subjects, time is a factor. Students need time to practice and play and if time is taken for peer assessment, there will be less time for practice.

Factors that increase body dissatisfaction:

family and peers, comparison, fat shaming, body ideals, personality traits, fear of failure, social media influence, at risk times

Support positive nutrition:

abundance mindset instead of starving

link food to function

recognise that food has a multi-faceted role

be aware of misinformation

Extend:

Be more mindful when talking about food and outlook on body to prevent negative influence on relationship with food or body shaming.

lead by example.

Challenge:

talk about function over looks

complement effort

talk about what they need to have instead of limiting of what they should not eat.

How does the information or ideas shared at the conference connect to what you already know or do in your teaching?

• Inculcation of SEC intentionally in lessons / school experiences to support student learning is important (even necessary)

• "Development of social-emotional learning in students may be viewed as an additional workload for teachers already overwhelmed by the heavy time and emotional commitment required (Lee, 2023)"

  • "Buy-in of teachers, students, and parents is needed"

Extend

What new ideas or perspectives did you gain from the conference?

• Use of Educational Neuroscience to bridge educational policy and practice

• Use of RCC (Readiness, Coherent construction and Consolidation) Framework in lesson planning (I think?)

Challenge

What is still challenging or puzzling? What questions do you have?

• (as mentioned in presentation) varying readiness levels of teachers and students (cos teachers and students come and go). There is a continual need to convince / train students and teachers to be receptive.

Extend - Classroom practices can unintentionally shape students’ beliefs about learning—such as the idea that all problems should be solved quickly or by following certain templates and procedures exactly as taught. We often cite the 'lack of time' as a an excuse not to employ Productive Failure as a way for students to learn and unintentionally nurture learners who are passive recipients rather than active meaning-makers. Moving forward, I want to learn more about micro-cycles of using PF in language learning and incorporate more open-ended tasks that allow space for students to struggle, fail, reflect and make meaning of their failures.

Challenge - What continues to challenge me is how to balance the demands of curriculum coverage and high-stakes assessments with the goal of deep learning and nurturing reflective learners. I am also curious about what effective formative assessment might look like if we truly valued conceptual understanding and student thinking, rather than procedural fluency. How can I redesign classroom structures and feedback systems to shift students’ mindsets without compromising curriculum expectations?

Extend : This was specifically experimented on student leaders, but profiling can be used also in FTT/ECG sessions which will be engaging for students. It also allows them to analyze their personality better.

Challenge : The quiz was quite lengthy even for teachers to complete, thus students may not have the patience to complete it. Budget may also be an issue as Braincore is likely to have charges for the detailed reports to students.

Extend: In HI, developing collaborative skills is one of the aim. This project chose to be intentional in their focus of developing both 21st-century competencies, (effective communicators and effective problem-solvers) and historical discipline lens of change and continue and historical empathy.  The project's relevance is enhanced through authentic task as groups must come up with end products bearing in mind SG  National Heritage Plan. Overall, students enjoyed the process and teachers noticed noticeable levelling up.

Challenge: This is a talent development project rather than a formal Historical Investigation assessment (Grades not at stake). It is worth exploring how HI can have mixed grouping of G2 and G3 students. Can explore Hougang Trail!

Some questions if this is embedded to our AA HI task: How do we ensure a balance of fun task with academic depth of the discipline?  How to assess 21^st cc competencies and historical understanding? What’s the collaborative processes, tasks and resources that allow the students to pick meaningful connections?

Extent: What caught my attention was how the schools worked together on the HI such that the groups were mixed with students across the schools and the focus was more on the 21CC skills rather than content.

Challenge: Consideration as to how to make this assessed as the schools that did this did not grade it as part of WA. Also a consideration of how we can maybe get students to group up between G2 and G3. Can potentially use this to explore hougang heritage.

Connect:

What Prof Manu shared is something that can be and should be transferred to the Languages and Humanities classrooms. However, how an productive failure be introduced into these classes and what would be the benefits are somethings that we should carefully weigh out.

Extend:

A quick conversation with a like-minded colleague made us come up with some possible ideas that are easy to implement with a few tweaks but what came out strongly was the ability of the teacher to facilitate and bring the learning together.

Challenge:

Prof Manu shared on the 4 A's: Affect, Awareness, Activation and Assembly. To me the main challenge would be in 'Assembling' the failure and making the learning happen after that as this requires great facilitation skills. The teacher must always bear in mind that the goal of productive failure is not to discourage students or punish mistakes but to create a learning environment where students are encouraged to take risks, learn from their mistakes, and develop a more robust understanding of concepts in languages or the humanities. 

Something really worth working on!

Extend:

There is still a place for direct instruction - teacher modelling on relating mathematical concepts across topics and contexts.

Obtained resources/activity ideas that can be conducted to support teaching of mathematics through experiential learning.

Challenge:

1. Find it challenging with the limited time in reality especially for Express/G3 math curriculum  – needing to be efficient with precious curriculum time (direct instruction is mostly much more efficient), as compared to activity-based instruction where drastically more time (can be 5-10 times more) to understand the same concept.

2. Want clarity on: The learning objectives of the Mathematics curriculum require students to be able to apply mathematical concepts into different contexts, and this is also assessed. This makes the mathematics curriculum seemingly a natural fit/engine for the development of adaptive thinking in our students. However, I wonder if this is too simplistic - I am of the view that students being able to solve the mathematics problems in varied contexts (and hence do well in assessments) need not mean that they have the adaptive thinking competency. Hope to have greater clarity on what adaptive thinking in mathematics and how it looks like (is it just what we've been doing all along - definitely helpful in crating teacher buy-in purposes/lowering perceived barriers of entry; or is there more?)

• spaced repetition is a concept previously covered as why we need to constantly revisit previous content and ensure that students are able touch base and make the connections throughout chapters

• In humanities, one of the main concerns has always been the lack of time to revise previous concepts, or even as simple as remembering dates or events

Extend

• this sharing gave a simple but effective way to ensure spaced repetition - through telegram bots that will ask an MCQ question on a regular basis. This allows for the constant reference to previous knowledge, without having to dedicate precious lesson time to the revision.

• Teachers are able to get a quick grasp on whether certain chapters or concepts were more complicated than others, and whether there's a need to dedicate lesson time to recap or revise some concepts for the whole class.

• the applicability of the telegram bot is similar to that of Kahoot, but allows for 'habit stacking' as introduced in 'Atomic Habits' by James Clear. A simple question in the morning on the way to school has lower barriers to adoption than a self-paced Kahoot Quiz

Challenge

• Is there a way to move beyond simple memory recall (due to the current bot being MCQ based, and to minimise barriers to adoption)?

• This is ultimately still self-directed learning. Is there a way to better meet the needs for lower-ability, low-motivation learners?

• Is DI possible with this?

Extend: I am reminded not to be complacent. While we have moved, it is important not to drop certain important teaching practices or focussing on certain salient ones esp Pt 3 in Connect. I also agree that time constraint and teachers' confidence in students continue to be challenges in enabling and implementing dialogic discussions, peer and self-assessment.

Challenge: Moving forward, I feel that to progress further and continue the curriculum shift we desire as a country, review and reflection of our processes and implementation must happen to ensure we are indeed putting in place all the necessary elements, rather some of the necessary elements. This means doing thorough curriculum reviews at the school level, monitoring and critically assessing classroom practices. Lastly, is to develop systemic enablers to uphold the fidelity of our teaching approaches and practices.

The emphasis on the explicit teaching of metacognitive (thinking) processes strikes a chord as I have constantly striving to advocate and promote mathematical discourse in my Math classrooms. The sharing on designing thought-provoking questions/activities did reinforce some of my routine practices and how I conduct my lessons.

The sharing on the usage of ICT tools and how to leverage on these platforms to scaffold and enhance students’ metacognitive awareness was relatable as Math teachers grapple to find the next effective/interesting platform to enhance our teaching. However, the many workshops on metacognition have been, by and large, similar - adapting and learning how to be effective with ICT tools is something that Math teachers try (and still trying) to equip ourselves with, to keep up with times since the onslaught of the use of technology in the education landscape.

Extend

The Classkick platform can also be used as a means to activate/check prior knowledge. It definitely promotes a process that is self-directed and provides space for students to think, collaborate and ponder.

Truthfully, I signed up for this workshop to explore if there are any other interesting functions on these platforms that I have used before, and if there are any other ways I can level up on leveraging on these tools/platforms through good practices being shared. It was insightful to see how the presenters organised their Classkick lesson - there was also a point system that I might try if I were to tap on Classkick again.

Challenge

I still believe in the skillfulness of a teacher in knowing how to facilitate - we can learn how to operate all the amazing EdTech tools available out there, yet it still boils down to how we are able to effectively facilitate a session that employs the use of an ICT tool to work for us (and not the other way around). So the challenge has always lie in us being able to tap on the functions appropriately such that it brings out learning, and not to explore a hundred different ICT tools for the sake of "something new" each time. Otherwise, it is just a replacement of another good lesson (that can be even more effective using hands-on learning experiences), only to spend more time in consolidation.

I would also love to see the future of EdTech marrying the merits of hands-on learning from the not-so-distant past, rather than an imbalanced shift to only be overemphasizing on the usage of Technology but forgetting the good practices of learning experiences that brings out the joy of learning (as effectively, if not better). Blended learning would be a great balance I seek and strive to achieve in the T&L of Elementary Math, even in the extremely technologically-advanced world today.

Connect – I personally agree with the  “generative effect” that was shared during the session. Currently, I would use questioning techniques to gather responses, this is a gauge of the students’ prior knowledge and it serves as a trigger or lesson opening for my lessons. For example, “what is a hospitality industry?” From the incorrect responses, students tend to appreciate and remember the correct term for a longer period of time.

Extend – The session shared many useful insights like ‘students need to struggle first before deeper understanding can take place. Sometimes, we would just give clear instructions to students without encouraging deeper thinking. This often results in poor knowledge retention. The Play effect and generative effect enhances students’ struggles initially which will result in more cognitive benefit. See-connect-transfer is mental model that requires learner to apply the knowledge flexibly and this is the challenge.

Challenge – Time constraint. Sometimes we are restricted by the volume of syllabus coverage and no time to try out such framework. To design class activities to facilitate productive failure is a challenge. How do we encourage risk taking whereby students are willing to try but yet fai too? How do we as teachers make it safe for them to fail but still have the confidence or resilience to search for the deeper learning or correct answers?

Session 2: Fostering interdisciplinary thinking through concept based on 21st century compentencies

The school adopts school wide programme in the IP and non-IP areas to develop the skills of 21st century. From Sec 1 to Sec 3, an inquiry based approach was used for all departments and school programmes. It deepens the students' thinking processes to incorporate these skills. For eg: simple activity of calculating the time taken from the classroom to science lab and introducing a science concept with it. It also exhibit elements of collaborative learning. They also have a curriculum that focuses on self - culture - community throughout sec 1 - 3. Self - focuses on their sense of belonging to the school and was reinforce by departmental activities as an inter-disciplinary effort to integrate the 21st century skills. Culture - importance of persevering Spore culture. Community - advocacy to the community.

Factors that increase body dissatisfaction were brought up and consolidated: body ideals, comparison, fat shaming, social media influence, personality traits, etc.

Extend:

• Thinking Abundance mindset rather than Restriction / Scarcity mindset

• Learning to practise Mindful Eating using the 5 senses

• Reframing Food Talk through communication (e.g. avoid labelling food as "good" or "bad", moving focus from weight to function)

• Praising qualities and attributes that are not appearance-based

Challenge:

• Paradigm shift in terms of mindset (cognitive), mindful eating (emotions and behaviour) and reframing food talk (communication) will take time and practice. Reminders from colleagues who also attended the session will be helpful.

• The theory behind spaced repetition and retrieval practice connects to what we already know about Ebbinghaus' Forgetting Curve - memory retention of simple facts declines over time if the person does not make intentional effort to commit certain things to memory. So, in my current teaching, I employ strategies such as check-in activities and exit passes, to help students to recall and reflect on what they have learnt. During lessons, I also give out simple online quizzes at the start of the lesson just to jog the memory of students for a topic. But I wanted this process to be more student-centric, so that students can become more self-directed (doing the learning at their own time), and for certain topics which required a bit more memory work, how I could trigger learning in students remotely - without us having to spend time in the classroom doing the recall/recap.

Extend

• Presenter shared that creating this telegram chatbot also adds on to habit formation - linking to James Clear's Atomic Habits where he talked about habit stacking. What I found useful was that the intent of these chatbots can also tap on the students' current habits of using Telegram and insert a new habit stacking formula each time they open Telegram - "After/Before [Current Habit], I will [New Habit]". This is especially useful for the self-regulated learning work that our team is working on for 21CC.

• I am keen to try this out for lower ability learners because it can give them greater motivation for a complex and conceptual subject like Chemistry.

Challenge

• Perhaps something for us to consider is how to inject feedback practices into the platform as well.

Extend: This builds on not just our upper secondary drama o level programme but gives some thought on how this could extend towards Music and other presentation styles.

Challenge: The key challenge of this is that it may not be immersive enough and requires some more upskilling and PD to be meaningfully enacted in class. This would mean looking into Chinese opera, kathakali and maybe even wayang kulit. This best exists to give students new modalities for expressions and to let them fuse them together as they construct learning.

Extend - creating deeper real life situation yet possibly more current scenarios through coursework to throw students into a ‘deeper’ end of the pool instead of just using simpler safely proven scenarios for problem solving. This can allow students to be thrown into discussing possibilities and hence greater opportunities created to show students the ‘better’ way by discussing their solutions’ shortfalls.

Challenge - it can possibly create a lot more excessive lesson preparation that can discourage teachers, or in worse scenarios, not allow teachers to complete their necessary curriculum in the planned schedule.

The presenter’s focus on structured peer feedback immediately resonated with my current English Language teaching practices. The emphasis on creating a positive classroom environment where students feel safe to give and receive feedback aligns with my own efforts to foster respect and collaboration in my lessons. The idea of co-constructing performance criteria is something I have tried when introducing new writing genres, as it helps students internalise what makes a piece of writing effective. The workshop’s suggestion to use exemplars and model feedback is also consistent with my practice of showing students sample essays and analysing them together.

Extend

The five-stage process for peer feedback gives me a clearer, more systematic way to implement peer review in my classroom. I am particularly interested in dedicating a lesson to explicitly discuss the value of feedback and to co-create norms for constructive criticism—this will help set a positive tone for all peer review activities. Involving students in creating success criteria for writing assignments, such as narrative or argumentative essays, will help them better understand the elements of effective writing and make their feedback more focused and meaningful. The ‘sandwich’ method (positive-improvement-positive) is a practical structure I can teach my students to help them give balanced and actionable feedback on their peers’ drafts. I also see the value in allocating time for students to reflect on the feedback they receive and plan revisions—this step can encourage deeper learning and greater ownership of their writing progress. Integrating peer feedback into regular writing lessons, rather than as a separate activity, is a useful strategy for managing lesson time more efficiently.

Challenge

One ongoing challenge is ensuring that all students, regardless of their language proficiency, can give specific and helpful feedback. Some students may struggle to articulate their thoughts or may default to vague comments like “good job” or “needs improvement.” I am curious about how to scaffold the feedback process for students who are less confident in English, perhaps by providing sentence starters or feedback stems. Another area I would like more clarity on is how to measure the impact of peer feedback on students’ writing skills over time—what indicators should I look for, and how can I track progress systematically? Lastly, I am interested in exploring more practical examples of feedback rubrics and templates tailored for different writing tasks and ability levels, to ensure consistency and quality in peer feedback across my classes.

Extend:

Challenge: How to organically cultivate create and civic capacities with students at this age

Extend
What extended my thinking was the shift in perspective, that resilience isn’t only cultivated through grand experiences like overseas learning journeys, but in the everyday moments: a failed test, a peer disagreement, or a self-doubt. The “I am, I can, I have” framework and the emphasis on the power of relationships (teacher-student, peer, and inner self) helped me see how these small moments can be opportunities to plant seeds of resilience. It’s a powerful reminder that our words, presence, and reflections with students matter deeply.

Challenge
This challenges me to rethink how I intentionally create those teachable moments. How can I consistently guide students to reflect meaningfully and help them transform self-talk and relational experiences into resilient actions? One step I’ll take is to actively build positive thinking habits in my students, not only by modeling optimism, but also by drawing out their inner strengths in class reflections and conversations.

In Elias Park primary, they tap on wealth of experiences and prior knowledge by having open Classroom and collective lesson planning. Post lesson reflection was also done.

SLS was used to gather students responses and in D.I. Their action plan was to design lesson with Edtech Pedagogical scaffold and SLS. Enact e-pedagogy lessons through open classroom and micro teaching. Lesson feedback form was done to gather about the strengths of the lessons and how there can be improvements.

the challenges faced were teachers might not be able to relate what they are ding to the whole picture.

Connect: Taking it back, relevant SLS tools can be used to excite students learning and give relevant feedback for improving their understanding. SLS tools can also be used as flip classroom for greater understanding of the lesson ahead.

Extend: Collaboration among the teachers to generate learning and feedback activities

Challenge: One challenge teachers face is making engaging and creative lessons while ensuring students learn and master the conceptual knowledge they need to cope for national exams.

Extend: One of the key takeaways from the workshop was having a guidebook for AI tools and practices. In their guidebook, they have divided it into:

Chapter 1: Department Best Practices

• Terminology and Foundational Principles

• Classroom Management

• Student Malpractice and case management Flowchart (Key Highlight)

Chapter 2: Case Studies for Discussion

Chapter 3: Pedagogy and Lesson Ideas

Chapter 4: Library of Tools

In the first chapter, they highlighted that as a department, they developed a flowchart to deal with cases involving plagiarism etc. but focus on guidance rather than comprehensive detection of misuse. As such, cases of misuse of AI are not met with punitive action.

The other chapters are constantly updated depending on the tools/cases they may encounter. As such, I saw benefits of doing this as compiling different tools along with guides on how to use may be beneficial for the department and encourage teachers to try out various tools in their classrooms without having to “start from scratch”. It would also encourage active discussions and feedback cycles that would help us refine our approaches and use of AI tools which I believe, can allow us to further reflect and refine our assessments and pedagogy especially as a beginning teacher myself. I also find the flowchart to be helpful in dealing with cases of AI. At least, there is a guide that we can fall back on when we are uncertain on how to handle certain cases.

Challenge:

While there are benefits to having a guidebook, it does take time to develop one that is comprehensive enough. For ACSI, it took them a good year or two to get to the stage they are at. Furthermore, with AI tools constantly evolving, it may be tough to keep track and keep up with the changes and update the guidebook effectively. Who will update the book? When to update the book? Will teachers read the guidebook if it’s too long? These are questions that I have as I followed the session. I am interested in exploring how we can implement practices that can further standardise our teaching and assessments when it comes to the use of AI tools and cases of misuse of AI. Perhaps, the flowchart could be a start?

Realised that some of the different forces of Ritchhart's cultures of thinking framework are used in my classroom unintentionally -

Opportunities: intentionally selecting appropriate stimuli to enhance and promote thinking among students; Time: making time for students' questions and contributions; Routines: incorporating thinking routines into pedagogies that fit lesson objectives best to achieve different outcomes.

Extend:

I feel like what I really got out of this session was the intentionality of incorporating these forces of cultures and being clear about encouraging students' voice and discussion as the forefront.

Something I would like to be more intentional about is to more intentionally think about what platforms (esp. collaborative platforms) I can use in class to give students the space to extend and elaborate and develop ideas of others - e.g. rather than just getting students to post their responses to a question on padlet but to encourage them to develop one another's responses or ideas. And perhaps even provide other thinking routines / pedagogies to allow more cross-pollination and development of ideas and thoughts.

Also, another thing I would like to do is to more intentionally select and then incorporate some of the thinking routines appropriate for various purposes (i.e. exploring ideas, gathering and organising ideas, digging deeper to make sense of ideas) into lesson activities. And building on providing time for them to develop one another's ideas, for them to look at one another's' thoughts and elaborate / comment on them too.

Challenge:

Time is always a challenge in terms of balancing coverage of content vs allowing for time and space for students to deliberate and develop one another's ideas. Would like to think about how to allow for opportunities to provide students with time to reflect deeply on thoughts of one another and how the phenomena / topic can change and evolve in the real-world and perhaps condensing the activity to fit the duration of the class time but not losing the essence of it.

Extend: Relook into lesson activities, consider implementing the 4 "I"s (cultivating creative and civic capacities framework) for more artful conversation that reflects identity and society, instead of diving straight into technicality.

Challenge: How do we organically cultivate civic capacities and curiosity in students this age?

Dr. Roszalina’s message on building a pedagogy that is fresh (segar), aware (sedar), and considerate (peduli) deeply resonates with my current beliefs in teaching. Her emphasis that it’s not merely about using technology, but how wisely we use it, aligns strongly with my practice. In a world saturated with tools and apps, my pedagogy becomes the anchor—it guides the “why” and “how” of using these tools meaningfully.

I also appreciate the reminder that education is not a solitary effort. The collaborative spirit becomes more apparent with technological integration, where teachers, students, and even AI platforms like ChatGPT play co-constructive roles in learning. This synergy between pedagogy and e-pedagogy is something I already value, and this session reaffirms its importance.

Extend

The session introduced several ideas that expand my current understanding and practice. One powerful insight was viewing gamification as healthy competition. This perspective encourages me to rethink how I can integrate game elements to cater to today’s learners without compromising educational integrity. However, I now realize that not every element needs to be gamified—it's essential to consider which components suit my students' diverse profiles.

Another extension to my practice is the integration of AI and creative tools like podcasts. The concept of students creating podcasts to express understanding or share content with peers is both innovative and empowering. It not only nurtures creativity but also encourages content ownership. Furthermore, teaching students to be excellent prompt engineers when using ChatGPT for essay writing can significantly shape their thinking skills. It’s a double-edged sword, however, and raises deeper questions about how to ensure integrity and originality in student work.

This presentation has pushed me to rethink: How can I maintain focus in my T&L while embedding technology creatively? The answer may lie in thoughtful planning and designing learning experiences that balance engagement with depth.

Challenge

Despite the inspiring ideas, several challenges still remain. Teaching Generation Alpha—visual, interactive, and kinesthetic learners—is a new territory. Their learning preferences demand dynamic and stimulating methods. As teachers, we may find it difficult to keep pace with technological advancements and student expectations simultaneously. We must not only integrate technology but also aestheticize and personalize our pedagogy to spark curiosity and interest.

Moreover, the willingness to constantly recreate and redesign lessons to suit tech-rich environments requires not only technical skill but also emotional resilience. The balancing act between content, creativity, and curriculum goals remains a complex challenge. The path forward demands that we, as educators, not only adapt—but evolve—with intentionality and care.

Extend : If we can't bring our kids out to nature, we can bring nature to them. Covid forced the faculty to think of ways to allow the students to still understand about the plants and flora around them. The team brought in plants from around the area to the lab instead of having a walk outside which evolved into a better learning experience for the students.

Challenge : To really instill a love and awareness of nature and the importance of having a sense of place in our students. To know that there are stories and history in the places they are at(eg. road names, buildings)

How does the information or ideas shared at the conference connect to what you already know or do in your teaching?

From Dr Rosza’s sharing, she affirms the current situation and struggles with using technology in teaching Mother Tongue in the classroom. She shares how again the role of technology is to assist and not take over the role of teachers in imparting valuable skills and values to the students. She further emphasises the fact that the use of technology is present to inject the joy of learning in platforms such as Kahoot, Blooket etc. assist in capturing the interest of students who are now less proficient in their Mother Tongue due to lack of practice at home. 

Extend 

What new ideas or perspectives did you gain from the conference? 

I learnt that we must ensure there is a balance in the use of technological platforms when teaching. Sometimes we get too excited in using a variety of useful tech tools that we are not able to use them effectively in the classroom. Thus, we should strive to use these tools wisely to ensure that the lesson is more focused and the objectives are met. In addition to this, we should also remember to supplement our lessons with traditional forms of assessment such as reading and writing via pen and paper so that students are able to apply these skills not only in their exams but also through real life applications. 

Challenge 

What is still challenging or puzzling? What questions do you have? 

In my opinion, the challenge for me is the fact that even with these tech tools which serve to ignite interest in the subject matter during lessons, students are still unwilling to do their best or prioritise their Mother Tongue in comparison to their other subjects when they leave the class. This may even be so because their families also do not place importance in the usage of their Mother Tongue. Hence, how do I ensure that this joy of learning not only happen in the classroom but also continue to develop outside? This especially so when students already struggle practicing their language in class. 

Dialogic Talk is a pedagogical approach that uses discussion and dialogue to foster learning and critical thinking. It involves participation and the sharing of ideas, ultimately aiming to build shared knowledge and understanding which I normally do in the classroom.

Extend:

Students are given the opportunity to discuss, debate, and exchange views, which in turn enhances critical thinking, helps them understand that everyone has different perspectives, and indirectly encourages them to accept others’ views with respect. What really caught my attention was the 6 elements in Dialogic Talk Framework; Justification, Principles, Repertoires) and Signs that show Dialogic Talk takes place in the classroom.

Challenge:

Students' language barriers are indeed a constant challenge that I face in the Malay language classroom. How can we stimulate students who are weak in Malay (for example, G1 and G2 students), as well as those who are very shy and find it difficult to use Malay or express their opinions in ML? Will these factors affect the effectiveness of dialogic talk?

Professor Harrison highlighted the importance of cultivating cyber wisdom—the ability to make thoughtful and ethical decisions in the digital world. He emphasised that nurturing cyber wisdom is essential for developing good character and virtues in today’s technology-driven society. During his sharing, he introduced four key strategies for developing cyber wisdom. Notably, some of these—such as the reasoning method—are already used in our CCE lessons to help pupils reflect, ask meaningful questions, and make responsible choices online.

Extend

Professor Harrison’s point that digital technologies can impact human flourishing both positively and negatively made me reflect on how our school nurtures cyber wisdom. He stressed that the effects of technology depend on our individual and collective character, values, and digital wisdom.

1. With the wide reach of technology, students today may develop two sets of values—one offline and another online. This gap can lead to the misuse of digital platforms. Schools often focus on correcting or preventing such behaviour, but in doing so, we may overlook the opportunity to guide students to use technology for good.

2. Instead of just managing risks, we should also help students discover how technology can be used positively—to show empathy, foster gratitude, build connections, and serve others.

3. Encouraging students to focus on the well-being of others, such as showing appreciation to their mothers, can help reduce the misuse or negative impact of technology. This shift in approach supports the cultivation of cyber wisdom in a way that reflects the values we aim to instil in both their online and offline lives.

Challenge

Professor Harrison and fellow educators also spoke about the crucial role of parents in developing cyber wisdom. He emphasised that family guidance plays a key part in helping children grow into responsible and well-rounded digital citizens.

This reminded me of our Cyber Wellness workshop for Secondary 1 parents. The low registration rate may suggest that cyber wisdom is not currently a top concern for many families. This presents a challenge and an opportunity: we need to work more closely with parents to raise awareness and guide them in understanding the moral dilemmas their children may face online. By doing so, we can foster a shared understanding and ensure students receive consistent guidance both at home and in school.

Extend: We can create work that students can use AI to do. Instead of a blanket no to using AI, have students acknowledge that AI is part of their work and get them to annotate works that were done using AI. In this way, students will feel safe and assured that using AI is not about copying but about helping them work smarter and more efficiently.

Challenges: Monitoring students work and behaviour online can be tough. We also need students to be very honest about the work they submit. Creating curriculum that embrace AI.

Extend: In Upper Secondary Drama O-Level, we use similar framework (Leban’s Movement Framework) to help students in their physical movement and physical expressions. This session was helpful to build on my current knowledge on how I could further apply it in my future Drama lessons (eg. Using story as a theme). Furthermore, teachers are also facilitators and we need to create a safe and conducive environment for joy of learning and discovery to take place.

Challenge: Even though this workshop was mainly based on PE and Dance CCA contexts, the concepts mentioned in this workshop can be applied to any other movement-based lessons. Besides PE and Aesthetics subjects, I wonder if these movement-based activities could be applied into any other core subjects that would benefit the students in their learning too?

Connect: Outdoor Education if often thought of as Adventure Learning, but this is only one dimension of OE. The Environmental dimension and the Sense of Place dimensions are often neglected. I think in our current education landscape, we have to look at the other 2 dimensions to balance our approach and to be more sustained in delivering student learning outcomes in OE without adding too many stand alone activities.

Extend: We could and should explore more synergies with other departments and collaborate more on existing Student Development Programmes so that OE LOs can be delivered more effectively and in a more sustained manner.

Challenge: No real challenges as the presenting school had answered all the clarifying questions clearly. It is up to us now to move or not.

The workshop introduced the use of AI, specifically BrainCore, to engage students in completing a survey that helps identify their individual profiles — their strengths and areas for growth. This data-driven approach enables educators to tailor strategies that support each student more effectively. At Xinmin, we currently adopt The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership (Leadership Challenge Model) to guide our student leadership development. In addition, we run talent development programmes such as the XinArts Academy to nurture students' potential.

What resonated with me most during the workshop was the emphasis on personalisation. As teachers, we work with large cohorts of students, and the nature of our interactions with them can vary widely. Due to time constraints and the teacher-to-student ratio, some of our observations or feedback may not always be delivered as meaningfully or promptly as we would like. I can see how AI could serve as a helpful tool in laying the groundwork, by providing insights into each student — so that when conversations do occur, we are better equipped to go straight to the heart of the matter.

Extend:

The session expanded my understanding and interest in tapping on AI and incorporating it strategically in education. Tools like BrainCore and SchoolAI can provide data-driven insights into students’ learning profiles, which can help teachers identify patterns in strengths and challenges more systematically. Tapping on AI, we can also leverage deeper conversations and targeted developmental strategies to nurture student leaders in different areas (leadership, IP, VIA etc.)

Challenge:

However, while the potential of AI tools is promising, there are still several challenges to consider. Developing technology, therefore some of the data captured may not be entirely reliable / accurate. Teachers may end up spending more time managing administrative tasks or verifying the accuracy of the data.

Students need to understand true value in the platform. Need to learn how to use the insights meaningfully and be self-directed in taking ownership of their growth. I am curious about how we can compliment more comprehensive instructional strategies with AI tools to better facilitate self-directness (value) in student. Also, on how we can (re)shape students' perception of AI as "easy way out" and direct them to harness the power of tech in real-life scenarios.

The integration of the FAST (Feeling, Action, Speech, Thoughts) framework aligns with my current emphasis on helping students write more vividly and empathetically in their Chinese compositions. I also regularly guide students to include inner thoughts and dialogues to enrich character development, which resonates with the FAST approach. Furthermore, the use of digital tools like Padlet for collaborative writing mirrors my practice of encouraging peer feedback and sharing in online spaces such as Google Classroom. While I have offered direct feedback myself, the use of an AI bot like Fairbot to provide immediate, tailored support takes this idea further and aligns with my aim of promoting learner autonomy and timely feedback.

Extend：

The most valuable takeaway was the structured use of an AI companion (Fairbot) during the drafting process. The idea of scaffolding writing with AI support—not just grammar checking, but guiding narrative techniques using the FAST framework—is particularly inspiring. I had not previously considered how AI could reinforce specific writing strategies beyond surface-level corrections. Additionally, positioning AI as a “study companion” rather than just a tool changes how students perceive and engage with feedback. The combination of individualised support and peer learning via Padlet presents a powerful model for blended, collaborative learning.

Challenge：

One challenge I foresee is ensuring that students use Fairbot effectively and not passively—how do we train them to engage critically with the feedback rather than accept suggestions unthinkingly? Another concern is the accuracy and cultural sensitivity of AI feedback, especially when teaching nuances in Chinese writing. I am curious about how Fairbot is programmed: How is the feedback calibrated for different student abilities? Can the AI differentiate between literal and figurative expressions in Chinese?

The ideas shared during the FA-Math session connected strongly with my current efforts to make learning more student-centered and reflective. The emphasis on constructive alignment—between success criteria, tasks, and feedback—resonated with how I already design assessments, but this framework provided a clearer, more structured approach. I also appreciated the structured use of reflection questions, which aligns with my belief in fostering metacognitive skills in students.

Extend

I gained several new insights from the session. Most notably, the breakdown of lesson preparation into readiness, engagement, and mastery phases provided me with a more nuanced way to think about task design. The use of AI-generated hints and feedback, as well as teacher-created ones, was new to me, and I see great potential in leveraging this to support diverse learners. I also found the approach to supporting student self-directed learning and feedback literacy to be particularly forward-thinking—something I’d like to incorporate into my own classroom practice.

Challenge

I am still trying to fully understand how to craft reflection questions that effectively prompt students to identify their errors and take action. Another area I’d like more clarity on is how to best monitor the heat map and student entries to provide timely, targeted intervention—especially in a classroom with many learners. I’m also curious about how to strike the right balance between teacher-created and AI-generated support, ensuring quality without over-relying on automation.

Connect

• Collaboration through school partnerships to enhance disability awareness

• Having the guiding principles of inclusivity

Extend

• Deepen collaboration: Having common spaces like recess for conversations and games together

• Joint PD and workshops with partner school

Challenge

• How feasible is it in our school context? Timetable constraints?

  
  

Session 2: Uplifting the Learning Experiences of Students

Connect

• It is important to recognise that some students may not have access to opportunities at home, school serves as a vital space for their growth and development and help students find their area of interest

• Tier Programmes / Theme

• Intentional mixing across classes/streams

• Include E21CC in all our programmes and activities

Extend

• Greater Synergy: Leverage on Department, Partners and other stakeholders

• CCA Partnerships (Internal: SAC, Alumni, Parents) - Eg: Doing make up for PA CCAs, part of the spectators)

• CCA Partnerships (External: Sports Industry Professionals) - Eg: Learning Journey with NYSI, Partnership with Unleash the roar (this was more for Football CCA, we can consider other council for our school's CCA)

• ECG through CCA: SPF, SAF Open House (UG groups)

• Sports Science in CCA - Collaboration with NYSI, sharing on nutrition and recovery

• Use of data analytics - Eg: Catapult System

• Motivational talks by recognised sports personalities

Challenge

• How can we more proactive in our partnerships?

• How can we develop greater synergy?

The ideas shared during the session strongly resonated with my ongoing efforts to promote student self-reflection and independence in the mathematics classroom. I already try to incorporate metacognitive prompts in my lessons, such as asking students to explain their reasoning or identify their mistakes. The emphasis on using ICT tools to make metacognitive thinking more visible aligns with my belief in leveraging digital platforms to support learning. Classkick, as introduced in the session, reminded me of platforms like Kahoot and Mentimeter that I’ve dabbled with, but its real-time feedback loop and student-centered interface seemed particularly suited for mathematics learning.

Extend

One new perspective I gained was how Classkick can serve not just as an assignment tool, but as a live window into students’ thought processes. The presenter showcased how teachers can view student work in real time, offer targeted feedback instantly, and even allow peer feedback—creating a collaborative and responsive learning environment. I was especially intrigued by the ability to embed scaffolding within the tasks, such as hints or guiding questions, to nudge students towards metacognitive reflection. This gave me concrete ideas on how I can more intentionally design digital tasks that prompt students to pause and think about how they are approaching problems, not just what the answer is.

I also appreciated how the platform allows students to ask for help anonymously, which could lower the barrier for students who are typically reluctant to seek clarification. This could promote more equitable classroom participation.

Challenge

While I am excited by the possibilities, I am still wondering how best to manage classroom routines and time effectively when incorporating a new tool like Classkick. Given the constraints of a typical lesson period and varied student digital readiness, how can I ensure that integrating such a platform enhances rather than distracts from core lesson objectives?

I’m also curious about how to measure or assess the quality of students' metacognitive reflections on the platform. What does effective metacognitive engagement look like digitally? What should I look out for when monitoring their responses or annotations?

• I believe it is important to integrate generative AI into our teaching and learning, as AI is becoming a permanent in our daily lives.

• Integrating AI with our lesson provides opportunities for us to guide students to engage with AI meaningfully and responsibly. The goal is to help them see it as a tool to support learning and creativity—not as a shortcut to answers.

• As educators, learning to harness AI to our benefit may help us work lesser but teach better.

What new ideas did I gain

• Planning inquiry based learning at multiple levels (individual, group, class) so that we can minimally ensure learning at individual levels.

• Training for critical thinking in students by having them respond meaningfully to the answers provided by chatbot

What is still challenging

• How to integrate AI into inquiry-based learning that moves beyond feedback.

• Are there other ways to integrate AI more seamlessly and effectively into Teaching and Learning – what are the tasks that can be simplified using AI so that more time can be spent on more meaningful activities that build critical thinking in students.  

Mdm Ho introduced the principles of Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) and how AI can be leveraged to deepen thinking in the learning of the chinese language. There are six steps in IBL: Tuning In, Finding Out, Sorting, Going Further, Reflection, and Action. AI can enhance each of these stages. For example, during "Tuning In", AI generated images can help to visually represent complex concepts, which can act as an aid to deepen students understanding. In my classroom, I also utilize AI tools to create custom visuals that can effectively convey difficult concepts, especially when I can't find suitable images online.

Extend:

AI can also be effectively integrated into other 5 steps of IBL to enhance students' learning experience. For example, in the process of "Finding Out", where students seek for information to address their questions. Teachers can apply the use of AI platforms like POE or ChatGPT to assist students in their learning. In this case, AI tools will be acting as a "digital knowledgeable other" that can adapts to different student needs, for example offering personalized assistance such as tailored prompts, suggested resources and feedback. This approach not only helps students in getting instant information but also enables them to engage in active learning, as well as promoting their critical thinking skills.

Challenge:

AI platforms can provide students with vast amounts of information. However, these tools are not always reliable. It is important that students understand how to distinguish the output produced by AI platforms from other reliable resources. Teachers can guide students using the 5 finger test by the NLB（Authority, Accuracy, Currency, Coverage and Objectivity）to evaluate the credibility of information. By applying this test, students can critically evaluate the information they encounter, ensuring they rely on credible sources for their research and learning.

• What I liked about this pedagogy is the reduction of the amount of teacher-talk in the classroom while allowing the teacher to provided targeted assistance to those in need. Students are also empowered to take ownership of their own learning progress.

• Learning to talk less to give students time to do/explore more is something that I’ve been trying to do in the classroom. However, it is sometimes difficult to think of activities to teach facts/ procedural knowledge in an engaging manner. This session provided an alternative to such topics.

Extend

• The session encouraged me to think about the way we organize our unit plans / lesson / resources. Based on the existing resources we have to teach (eg video resources, slides) and to assess learning (eg AFL worksheets), we could choose some units to reorganize them into a series of lessons that allow for students’ independent learning.

• We also need to be comfortable with organized chaos where students will be doing different things at the same time.

• Communication of purpose & intent should be shared with the students to encourage greater buy-in. Students can also learn to be accountable for their own learning by tracking their own progress through a google sheet tracker.

• DI can also be incorporated to further challenge high-progress learners when they are done with the series of lessons.

Challenge

• Wondering if this could be further gamified to create healthy competition amongst low-motivation learners to want to take ownership of their learning.

The workshop helped me see how Literature can play a vital role in helping students reflect on their relationship with the environment. What really resonated with me was the idea of “encountering otherness”—a concept I already value in my teaching. Literature often introduces students to different cultures, experiences, and ways of life. This sense of difference encourages self-reflection and can lead to personal transformation. I’ve always believed that Literature is about building empathy and broadening perspectives, and this aligns well with the speaker’s idea that climate change is, at its core, a failure of imagination.

Extend

The session extended my thinking by introducing ecocriticism—a way to use Literature to explore our relationship with nature and the environment. It reminded me that Literature isn’t just about stories, but about symbolic meaning and cultural imagination. The presenter shared 3 ways:

• A. Encountering Otherness

• B. Ecology & Ecosystems

• C. Histories & Futures

I liked the idea of using creative expression and collaborative learning to make ecocritical thinking more engaging for students.

Challenge

I’m still wondering how to apply ecocritical thinking across different types of texts—especially those that aren’t obviously about nature or the environment.

How can I help students think more deeply about their place in the ecosystem, even when the text isn’t explicitly ecological?

• The issue of students conducting science practicals like a recipe, without understanding, is a common issue faced in science, compounded with students using AI for quick answers.

  
  

Extend

What new ideas or perspectives did you gain from the conference?

• While the use of AI in class is not new, the team's approach to use it as an idea generation resource, coupled with teaching about digital management is a good reminder of how we can leverage on technology in the classroom, rather than avoid it altogether (e.g., using SLS heatmap to monitor project progress, SchoolAI to create a chatbot to help brainstorm ideas instead of finding ideas)

• It was also interesting how the team decided to keep the assessment rubrics the same for both Pure, E combined and NA combined sciences, as they wanted the students to learn and display the same skills. The degree to which they wanted students to display these skills was then moderated during their standardisation meetings.

  
  

Challenge

What is still challenging or puzzling? What questions do you have?

• The use of AI chatbots to help students generate ideas is interesting, and I wonder if it would be beneficial to do the same for content e.g., creating a chatbot that provides guiding questions to help students learn content better.

• I wonder whether giving the same rubrics across different subject levels would be beneficial to students, or hinder as those in combined sciences may require more unpacking or scaffolding of these descriptors in the rubrics to understand the requirements better, or may not have been exposed to certain prior skillsets at lower secondary.

Connect

The concept of ipsative assessment strongly resonated with my current approach to music education. I’ve always believed in nurturing students’ individual growth over time, and I often encourage students to reflect on their previous performances to identify areas of improvement. This webinar reaffirmed the importance of personal benchmarks over normative comparisons, especially in creative disciplines like music. The emphasis on student agency and self-regulation aligns with the reflective journaling and peer critiques we already use during ensemble practices and solo performance preparations.

Extend

One key takeaway was how the E21CC framework can support ipsative assessment by encouraging a longer-term, student-centered approach. The case studies presented helped me visualize how other educators in PE and Art are using similar strategies to empower their students. I found the integration of different assessment data—student reflections, teacher feedback, and peer reviews—to form a holistic view of progress particularly insightful. I’m now considering how to design more structured yet flexible reflection templates for my students to track their progress over the semester. This would help scaffold their self-assessment process more intentionally.

Challenge

While the concept is inspiring, I’m still grappling with how to document and report ipsative assessments effectively within our existing grading systems, which are often summative and comparative. I also wonder how to ensure consistency and objectivity in assessing progress when students are on such individualized paths. Additionally, I’d like more clarity on how to align ipsative practices with curriculum standards and school-wide assessment expectations. How might we advocate for more acceptance of this approach within institutional frameworks? And what professional development might be needed for teachers unfamiliar with this model?

The session on dialogic talk was a reminder of the importance of intentional, purposeful conversations in the classroom. Rather than simply receiving information, students are invited into a shared process of meaning-making — one that involves active thinking, questioning, and ultimately, arriving at deeper understanding. What stood out was that dialogic talk is not a standalone strategy; it must be grounded in strong classroom routines, clear expectations, and explicit teaching of metacognitive strategies. This reminded me that effective dialogic talk is most impactful when used as part of a gradual release of responsibility — moving from teacher-led modelling to student-led meaning-making. Given our current emphasis on strengthening students’ critical thinking and metacognition, the integration of dialogic talk is not just relevant, but necessary.

Extend

One aspect I appreciated was the speaker’s deliberate unpacking of how every element — from grouping decisions to question timing — contributes to the success of dialogic talk. I found it helpful how each teacher move was explained in detail: who to call on, when to signpost key ideas, and how to consider different activities that scaffold thinking. A deceptively simple but powerful insight was how cold calling can be used diagnostically — for instance, if a high-readiness student struggles to respond meaningfully, it may signal that the question or concept requires further scaffolding. This highlights how dialogic talk is as much a tool for formative assessment as it is for learning.

Challenge

A key challenge I foresee is ensuring equitable participation — how can we create space for all voices, not just the confident or articulate ones? While cold calling helps address this by prompting quieter students to contribute, I’m still thinking about how to keep every student actively engaged throughout the conversation. One of the core principles of dialogic talk is its cumulative nature — each contribution builds on the previous, leading towards a shared understanding. However, if students mentally check out at any point, they risk being lost as the discussion progresses. Signposting and using cues were suggested as ways to re-engage students, but I wonder if too much repetition might reduce the cognitive demand or cause disengagement among those who are already following closely. Balancing clarity, engagement, and challenge will be something to experiment with in practice.

(Extend) The suggestion that ~30% of math lessons should focus on developing CAIT is a new benchmark I could aim for. Being aware of AI-generated answers and designing tasks where students must think first before relying on tools. It expanded my understanding of similarity by using A-series papers, a real-world example I hadn’t considered before.

(Challenge) How can I effectively assess CAIT development in students? Are there rubrics or observable indicators?

What are some other low-prep, high-impact games like Square It that can be integrated into daily lessons?

Extend: What strikes me is that storytelling as a pedagogy extends beyond teachers as storytellers; it positions students as active learners who negotiate multiple narratives to develop a nuanced understanding of historical events. This approach recognises that students have prior knowledge that needs to be tapped into and addressed for proper sense-making. For storytelling pedagogy to be effective, there needs to be a schema (context and larger historical concepts).

Three elements are essential for an effective storytelling lesson:

1. An engaging story

2. Effective use of questioning

3. Opportunities for student reflection

   
   

The approach also utilizes the history inquiry cycle, where students are introduced to the inquiry question (a.k.a the narrative). They can then examine narratives through photographs, report and articles to understand different perspectives. In the reasoning process, students evaluate whether the sources challenge their assumptions and if they need to modify their views. What stands out to me is that the entry point of the inquiry cycle is through narrative. It offers opportunity for students to challenge and reframe existing narratives. This highlights the essence about history as the study of the past.

We can consider this for History lessons and furture HI tasks.

Skills of interpretation and comparing narratives can also serve as a prelude to learning skills such as identifying elements of surprise and assessing reliability. This pedagogy can be applied in other areas like Character and Citizenship Education (CCE).

Challenge: While there is potential to use this approach in other subjects like CCE, we need to consider the emotional engagement aspect.

• Purpose refers to a stable and broad intention to achieve something that is personally meaningful and has significance beyond self.

• When they are able to take steps towards understanding self, in search of that sense of purpose and of something larger than self, it comes with important social-emotional competencies that we want to nurture such as prosocial behaviour and high self-esteem.

• This connects to my own understanding of the importance and power of knowing themselves and giving them concrete goals to work towards. I was also reminded about the importance of shifting our conversations with students away from just careers and post-secondary pathways, to centre around helping them develop their sense of purpose which will take them further.

Extend

• It is also important o calibrate our own expectations - we are facilitators in this process and at the age of 13 - 16, it is okay if they are still not able to articulate it. Perhaps even knowing what they enjoy and what gives them energy is sufficient at this age and can serve as a strong basis for further exploration.

• We explored the use of conversation cards which centred around the frame of self / life (aspirations) / world (thinking about community) which is a useful frame for conversations that I would like to adopt.

• Beyond having a variety of prompts, using visual aids (e.g. a mindmap to capture their responses during the conversation to help them visualise links and common threads), and scaffolding is important to help students make the connections and their thinking more visible.

• We could explore using these prompts in 1-1 chats during FTT, or even in peer-peer conversations after student development experiences.

Challenge

• After having these conversations, what next and how do we help them follow up on it meaningfully? Beyond meaningful conversations, there also must be meaningful follow up to help them make sense of it.

• Additionally, how would follow up conversations look like with the student?

• While we role-played scenarios as students, I am curious to see how our own students would respond to these prompts and if it indeed helps them to understand themselves better.

The notion that anyone, including strangers and passersby, can act as a Samaritan to someone experiencing suicidal thoughts is both empowering and substantiated by research.

This evidence underscores the critical impact that ordinary individuals can have in moments of crisis. It aligns with the principles of the Alert-Approach-Assist (AAA) model, which emphasizes that recognizing signs of distress and taking compassionate action can be life-saving, regardless of one's relationship to the individual in need.

Extend

Building upon this understanding, it's imperative to disseminate and teach structured intervention frameworks like the AAA model more broadly. The model's five steps—Approach with Care, Empathize, Ask Suicide Questions, Check Safety, and Provide Resources—offer a clear roadmap for individuals to support someone in distress.

Challenge

Despite the availability of intervention models, challenges persist in addressing the stigma and anxiety surrounding suicide. Many individuals harbor misconceptions, such as the belief that discussing suicide may exacerbate the issue or that only professionals are qualified to help. These misconceptions can hinder timely and compassionate responses. Sharing success stories of bystander interventions can demystify the process and illustrate the profound impact of taking action.

Connect

Recognizing that not all students have equal access to opportunities outside of school highlights the critical role that school plays as a key environment for their growth and development. It is essential that school experiences help students discover and nurture their interests.

Intentional strategies such as mixing students across different classes or streams and embedding E21CC initiatives across all programmes and activities create inclusive and enriching learning spaces. Furthermore, the focus of education is not only on academics but on other areas as well.

Extend

The session emphasized the value of building stronger partnerships within the school and beyond. By collaborating closely with various departments, stakeholders, and partners, we can create more cohesive support for students. Examples include internal CCA partnerships involving the SAC, Alumni, and Parents, such as helping with makeup sessions for performing arts groups or engaging as spectators. Externally, partnerships with sports professionals and organizations like NYSI and “Unleash the Roar” offer unique learning experiences that could be expanded to other CCAs.

Additionally, tapping on the ECG counsellor to help students find their strengths and purpose during CCA is beneficial. Collaborations involving sports science, nutrition, and recovery through NYSI, alongside data-driven approaches further enhance the learning experience. Motivational talks by renowned sports figures also serve to inspire students.

Challenge

1. How might we take a more proactive approach in cultivating and sustaining partnerships?

2. The balance between the right programmes and resources?

A key takeaway from the workshop by Professor Doctor Manu is the idea of designing lessons that allow students to fail productively at early stages. This encourages them to think creatively, to explore multiple approaches, and to learn deeply from their failures. When students get stuck, the natural tendency is often to give up. However, if we provide the right hints at the right moments, enabling them to move forward themselves, this is when true learning happens. Being stuck is not a roadblock but a necessary phase for meaningful cognitive growth.

In contrast, traditional direct instruction where teachers give all the instructions upfront before problem-solving, can limit students’ creativity and reduce their opportunities for adaptive thinking, which is essential in the 21st century. Creativity flourishes when students are allowed to grapple with challenges independently before receiving guidance. Instead of immediately providing solutions, allowing students to struggle and explore problems deeply can lead to stronger, more durable understanding. This approach encourages resilience and critical thinking, skills that are essential for lifelong learning.

Professor Manu emphasized that failure is not something to be avoided but embraced as a valuable part of the learning process. This shift from a fear of failure to viewing it as productive is especially relevant in today’s rapidly changing educational landscape.

Extend this to my lesson planning

Up until now, my lesson planning has primarily relied on direct instruction: delivering clear instructions before students tackle problems. Moving forward, I want to explore the opposite approach which is to present students with problems first, without instructions, to encourage productive struggle and deeper engagement. This aligns with the idea of intentionally designing for failure so students become adaptive learners equipped to thrive in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world.

As teachers, we become designers of this learning framework. AI tools can support us in generating such frameworks by helping create problem scenarios, hints, and scaffolds tailored to different learners’ zones of proximal development.

Challenge faced

One of the main challenges will be helping students overcome the fear of failure and resist the urge to wait passively for instructions. Many students are accustomed to waiting for explicit directions and may be reluctant to try and fail on their own. Encouraging a classroom culture where failure is seen as an opportunity rather than a setback will take time and patience. Teachers will need to consistently support and motivate students to persist in the face of difficulty, reinforcing that the process of trial, error, and adaptation is the path to true learning and creativity.

The discussions about the future of teaching and learning also highlighted the increasing role of technology and personalized learning. It became clear that as teachers, we must adapt our methods to foster creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving, rather than just rote memorization. The integration of tools that support exploratory learning, such as simulations and interactive platforms, will be key to preparing students for the complexities of the modern world.

• The session reminded me of what I used to do for my upper Sec Pure History classes but have not been able to do in the past 1-2 years or so.

• In particular - the physical environment matters (i.e. MLL is a good space with the right set up - moveable white boards to facilitate meaningful group discussions).

Extend

• Not exactly a "new idea or perspective" but the session really reminded me of what I was able to do in my History classes and the level of meaningful student-student, student-content interactions that my lesson activities were able to achieve when my lesson is held in a conducive physical environment.

• It gave me ideas on what suggestions I can provide when other learning rooms/spaces are being renovated.

• I would like to more intentionally let my students know that about the value for thinking and learning as outcomes - so group work/discussions are important and History lessons.

• It would be meaningful for me to invest time and energies in looking into the language I use ["Language moves"] in class to encourage and direct my students to of thinking that provides students with the vocabulary for describing and reflecting on their thinking.

Challenge

• Time and resources (physical space). MLL is good for around 30 students max. It is unsuitable for use when class size is big (e.g. 40). Humanities lessons are banded. If we have no access to a space which already has an ideal set up, how do we replicate it in a regular classroom? (e.g. working on seating arrangement/table arrangement perhaps)?

• Implementing a new routine / culture for a class will always take time. How do we inculcate all our Humanities students (ideally from Sec 1) to have the learning dispositions we hope to see (e.g. one whereby students are excited and engaged in their learning and that there is value in class discussion and learning from their friends' responses) bearing in mind time constraints - huge volume of content to cover - Aligning SOW across all 4 levels.

I found many parallels between the ACT Pedagogical Model and how we already approach art-making; especially in nurturing student agency. The emphasis on ideation through mechanisms, collaborative mock-up building, and iterative design thinking strongly resonates with how I guide students in exploring ideas, testing materials, and building visual narratives. The role of the teacher as a facilitator who encourages exploration, reflection, and student decision-making mirrors how I scaffold learning in our mini Art modules and help students research and connect to artworks that speak to them personally.

Extend

The session remind me of useful language and clarity in structuring deeper inquiry using frameworks like TPACK and SAMR. I was especially intrigued by how technology affordances were used not just for substitution but to truly transform the learning experience. For instance, having students present 3D ideas and test their designs in authentic environments is something I can imagine applying to our MAKERS@Xinmin curriculum, especially in guiding students to test prototypes or digital art pieces while connecting to real-world contexts. I am also inspired to revisit how we structure students' reflections.

Challenge

What I’m still thinking about is how to balance structure and autonomy, particularly for lower-secondary students who may not yet be confident in decision making. How much scaffolding is too much? How do I know when to step back? I’d also like to explore further how to design differentiated checkpoints for artistic growth that cater to students with varied readiness without diluting expectations. The session has sparked many ideas, and I’m now re-considering how we might adapt parts of the ACT model into our Art Curriculum and MAKERS.

This session highlighted Artificial Intelligence potential to promote self-directed learning and critical thinking skills. Using AI tools like TeacherGAIA allows students to learn at their own pace and take charge of their own learning. This resonates with my current practices to equip my students with the necessary skills to be future-ready thinkers.

Extend

The session introduced innovative applications of TeacherGAIA to facilitate inquiry-based exploration and self-assessment. One idea I plan to implement is using TeacherGAIA to track students' questions based on their interactions with the chatbot. This will be useful in helping me, especially with quieter students to providing insights into their thoughts and inquiries. Additionally, I can also use TeacherGAIA to help students to adopt the perspectives of historical characters. This will allow them to explore different viewpoints, which increases their understanding of historical events.  

Challenge

One significant challenge in utilising TeacherGAIA is crafting an effective system prompt. Without a well-structured prompt, the quality of the chatbot's responses may be compromised, potentially leading to less helpful feedback for students.

It is also interesting to hear that some teachers suggested using it to provide students with feedback about their work. However, I am curious about its effectiveness and meaningfulness. One concern would be the potential reduction in face-to-face interactions between teachers and students. Such interactions are crucial for building rapport and offering emotional support, which AI cannot replace.

The project’s innovative approach combines three key elements: encouraging students’ metacognitive thinking, defining distinct roles for teachers and students in the metacognitive process, and effectively integrating various ICT tools to promote metacognitive skills. I feel that what the project aims to achieve align with what I wish to achieve in my classes in monitoring and supporting students.

Extend

How the use of ICT tools enables me to monitor and assess student's level of understanding and making adjustments to my strategies and instructions to meet the different learning needs.

Challenge

How to regulate student's learning so that they can be more independent learners by monitoring their own progress and finding ways to progress by their own learning pace.

Extend - The session enabled me to acquire some practical strategies and innovative techniques that I can incorporate into my lesson design. What is more significant to me is that it made me realise that I needed to shift from a content-delivery to a facilitation mindset in order to be more effective at IBL. I need to provide more space for students to ask questions by trimming teacher talk to make room for student-led discovery.

Challenge - By the conclusion of the session, I had gained a clear understanding of how to design and implement IBL lessons. Moving forward, it would be advantageous to further explore strategies for developing resources that address a broader range of focus areas and thematic topics.

Extend:
What stood out to me was the structured five-stage approach to peer feedback. While I’ve used peer evaluation in class, I hadn’t considered dedicating time to co-construct performance criteria with students. This stage ensures that all students internalise what ‘good work’ looks like, rather than simply referencing a rubric given to them. Additionally, the strategies for scaffolding—such as using anonymous student work for whole-class practice and pairing stronger students with those who need more support—provided new ways to make feedback more accessible and inclusive.

The emphasis on creating a feedback-rich classroom culture, where students manage their emotions and take action on peer feedback, was a timely reminder that formative assessment is just as much about mindsets as it is about mechanics. I especially appreciated the reminder that feedback should result in more thinking for the recipient than for the giver.

Challenge:
One challenge I still grapple with is sustaining the quality of peer feedback once the scaffolds are gradually removed. How do we help students internalise feedback strategies so that it becomes second nature? Another area I’m curious about is how to ensure feedback leads to meaningful revision—especially when students may feel unsure or unwilling to act on peer comments.

I’d like to explore further how to provide time and structure for students to respond to feedback in ways that feel purposeful and not merely procedural. I also wonder how to embed emotional regulation strategies into the feedback process—so students don’t disengage when receiving constructive criticism.