I know that this is near and dear to the hearts of both Shawn and Dick. I believe that the Senior Project will change--the question to debate in this thread is HOW it should change.
1. Either enforce deadlines or not. It doesn't seem fair that at least one student this year failed due to late penalties, yet other students were allowed to turn in portfolio items after the deadline without being marked late.
2. Topic approval has to be centralized, and done early. Students would not be allowed to switch unless without getting their topic reapproved.
Your points are solid. My squad failed a student--and solely because he turned in every last piece of his portfolio late.
Also, I know that Shawn wants this presentation to be more rigorous. It should involve a proposal, an approval, and several due dates along the way.
If I may, my own experience can serve as a model. I did a senior thesis at San Diego State. Here was the process.
1. I approached a professor to serve as my advisor.
2. He said, "You need to get a proposal to me by eight a.m. tomorrow. Typed--one page."
3. I did it.
4. He approved it and assigned a draft--to be completed about half way through the semester.
5. I worked independently until then. Of course, I was a rather boring lad of twenty-two and writing about El Greco and Counter-Reformation Theology actually interested me. This might pose some sort of a problem for our own clientele. I do think that opening it up to any academic topic might solve the "do I gotta?" problem. But it might not.
6. I received feedback on the project.
7. I revised the project.
8. My advisor read it and gave it to his colleagues to read. They all agreed it was a worthy project and passed it. We could divide into overlapping discipline-based departments. Anyone doing a literary project could choose a literature teacher. The presentation would be to a panel of literature teachers. And so on.
The other components of the senior project--the business writing and such--would all go to the English department as they fall under the state guidelines for English, grades eleven and twelve.
I like the process you describe, Mel. If we wanted all of the presentations to be academic in nature, which I believe is the best course of action, it would also be a good idea to present them in front of a panel containing at least a teacher from that subject area.
I always tell the students that presenting the Rube Goldberg project is a good idea because it is visually exciting and academically based. But the main advantage is that you can spout off all these physics terms and sound smart because most likely no one will know what you're talking about. If you put these projects in front of Noah and Sonya they'd be much more challenging - I remember hearing that Noah gave Isaac a run for his money a couple years back.
Keep the ideas coming...but remember there will need to be multiple check points and ALL students must complete the project....therefore motivation (besides the threat of not graduating) and perceived "usefulness" are factors. Could "rigorous" include topics other than academic? Should the project start in the junior year? What about changes to the Portfolio? Thanks for your input, Dick P.S. How do we get more teachers to participate in this forum?? You guys must not be busy... : ) !
I agree with Mel, I think that the students need to be more formal with their proposals for the project. I've had a few students in the past that just can't decide on what they want to do, and they wait til the last minute to pick something, usually falling back onto a project they did the summer before (with their church group).
I also think it should be be academic based. I agree with Jonathan (have one panel member be a teacher in that subject area).
8 comments:
Some initial thoughts:
1. Either enforce deadlines or not. It doesn't seem fair that at least one student this year failed due to late penalties, yet other students were allowed to turn in portfolio items after the deadline without being marked late.
2. Topic approval has to be centralized, and done early. Students would not be allowed to switch unless without getting their topic reapproved.
Sorry, by "centralized", I meant, approved by either Shawn or Kim or a predetermined group of teachers.
Jonathan,
Your points are solid. My squad failed a student--and solely because he turned in every last piece of his portfolio late.
Also, I know that Shawn wants this presentation to be more rigorous. It should involve a proposal, an approval, and several due dates along the way.
If I may, my own experience can serve as a model. I did a senior thesis at San Diego State. Here was the process.
1. I approached a professor to serve as my advisor.
2. He said, "You need to get a proposal to me by eight a.m. tomorrow. Typed--one page."
3. I did it.
4. He approved it and assigned a draft--to be completed about half way through the semester.
5. I worked independently until then. Of course, I was a rather boring lad of twenty-two and writing about El Greco and Counter-Reformation Theology actually interested me. This might pose some sort of a problem for our own clientele. I do think that opening it up to any academic topic might solve the "do I gotta?" problem. But it might not.
6. I received feedback on the project.
7. I revised the project.
8. My advisor read it and gave it to his colleagues to read. They all agreed it was a worthy project and passed it. We could divide into overlapping discipline-based departments. Anyone doing a literary project could choose a literature teacher. The presentation would be to a panel of literature teachers. And so on.
The other components of the senior project--the business writing and such--would all go to the English department as they fall under the state guidelines for English, grades eleven and twelve.
I like the process you describe, Mel. If we wanted all of the presentations to be academic in nature, which I believe is the best course of action, it would also be a good idea to present them in front of a panel containing at least a teacher from that subject area.
I always tell the students that presenting the Rube Goldberg project is a good idea because it is visually exciting and academically based. But the main advantage is that you can spout off all these physics terms and sound smart because most likely no one will know what you're talking about. If you put these projects in front of Noah and Sonya they'd be much more challenging - I remember hearing that Noah gave Isaac a run for his money a couple years back.
"I remember hearing that Noah gave Isaac a run for his money a couple years back."
I can completely confirm that rumor.
Mel, I like the format you propose, too. I need to think about it a bit more before I have anything more to say...but I like it.
Keep the ideas coming...but remember there will need to be multiple check points and ALL students must complete the project....therefore motivation (besides the threat of not graduating) and perceived "usefulness" are factors. Could "rigorous" include topics other than academic? Should the project start in the junior year? What about changes to the Portfolio?
Thanks for your input,
Dick
P.S. How do we get more teachers to participate in this forum?? You guys must not be busy... : ) !
I agree with Mel, I think that the students need to be more formal with their proposals for the project. I've had a few students in the past that just can't decide on what they want to do, and they wait til the last minute to pick something, usually falling back onto a project they did the summer before (with their church group).
I also think it should be be academic based. I agree with Jonathan (have one panel member be a teacher in that subject area).
Post a Comment