Local Heritage Studies
A white-rat-teacher’s
experiences
Mrs. Agnes Lee
June 2009, revised
1
A possible 2009-2012 scenario
 History
students:
 SBA
assignments in all core subjects,
History and other elective subject(s)
 more
OLE activities.
 Those
activities require much
capacity in ‘self-directed learning’,
‘reading to learn’, risk-taking,
independent thinking etc...
2
A possible 2009-2012 scenario
 Those
activities may pull some
students away from their safety
zones.
 Some students, such as the quiet
and obedient ones, may not be able
to cope with these challenges.
 Consider stress problems.
 More preventive measures, the
better.
3
A possible 2009-2012 scenario
 History
 May
teachers
have to teach Liberal Studies
also
 i.e. have to supervise a great no. of
students to do SBA assignments in
2 subjects
 may have more team work
 may have more OLE duties etc...
4
A possible 2009-2012 scenario
For
both teachers and
students, those tasks could
be very time consuming and
exhaustive.
There are only 24 hours a
day.
5
A possible 2009-2012 scenario
 What
is the overriding tasks for
teachers?
 To
create outstanding academic
results?
 To guide students to strike a
balance between academic
achievements and healthy growth?
6
The white-rat-teacher’s principles in
this task of preparing exemplars

Minimum investment,
maximum outcome
 Strong discipline
on time-management
 Be sensitive and understanding
to students’ responses
7
Experiment 1 (2007-08)
 Teacher’s
background knowledge of
the SBA task
 Little,
just skimmed through the draft of
SBA Handbook
 time
available
 3 months
 late Feb to end of May
8
Experiment 1
Invited 3 F. 4 fast learners to do one SBA
written report
 1st supervision – 1 hour

Explained the task
 Drew attention to the part `Requirements’
 Drew attention to definition of ‘heritage’
 A hard copy of SBA handbook to each
student

9
Experiment 1

Arranged 6 more supervision sessions
30 min/session; in group
 Pre-set schedule and venue for the 6
sessions

Both teacher and students followed the schedule
as much as possible
 Gave prior notice when one appointment could
not be made


This mechanism helps to save time and
prevents confusion in time-management
10
Experiment 1

Teacher’s struggle in giving supervision:



2nd supervision session (before Easter holiday)



Strong intervention vs autonomy
Decision – autonomy comes first
Title Proposal – students chose ‘TVB’
no reading materials collected; empty talk only
3rd session (after Easter holiday)


Students narrowed down the topic – local drama
series of TVB
no reading materials collected; empty talk only
11
Experiment 1

By late-April


data-collection failed
Why?
few sources written in English version
 students - weak in flexibility;


Teacher’s reaction – more intervention
suggested ‘Po Leung Kuk’
 teacher’s briefing on ‘Po Leung Kuk ‘

12
Experiment 1

Mid-May
1st draft – wrong focus
 teacher’s reaction – instructed students to
re-write according to a question (This is
wrong.)

Late May – 2nd draft
 Pens down – Final Exam. was near

13
Experiment 1 – 2nd draft

The question given to students:

As a non-government organization of a long
history, has the Po Leung Kuk adjusted its
services according to the changing needs
of the HK society?
It is a wrong title – why?
 Po Leung Kuk



an organization, not a heritage X
the building of Po Leung Kuk

a building, a heritage 
14
Experiment 1 – trial marking
 1st
trial marking:
 Level
0
because the choice is wrong
 2nd
trial marking:
 Readjustment
of the definition of
‘heritage’  Level 1
15
Experiment 1 – draft 2

3rd trial marking:
Title of draft 2 was revised:
 Po Leung Kuk’s tradition of protecting
children and women
 保赤安良(protecting children and women)



a spiritual heritage
p. 104 – level 3

‘meaning’ was very slightly touched
16
Experiment 2 (2007-08)
After Easter holiday
 Two F.6 fast learner
 late April - Bun Festival
 May

Interviews at Cheung Chau
 Collected a few secondary source
 Teacher provided a few primary source
reading materials

17
Experiment 2
 Late
May – 1st draft (>4000 words)
 p.111
 Mid-July
 Just
– 2nd draft (>2400 words)
a shortened version
18
Experiment 3 (2008-09)
The purpose is to produce L4-5
exemplars
 From mid-Jan to mid-Mar 2009 (2 mths)
 F. 6 History students

Whole class;
 As one course assignment

19
Experiment 3 - controls
Teacher’s instruction:
 A printed copy of Schedule and Guidelines to
each student




Scheme of work
definitions of ‘heritage’, assessment criteria,
samples of citations (SBA Handbook),
Template: what/ change & continuity /
meaning
Advice students to choose from the list of
declared monuments under the AMO
20
Experiment 3 - controls

Title selection
students show hard copies of relevant
reading materials to get teacher’s approval
 Discourage students to collect materials
from internet only;
 Primary source materials – not compulsory
 URL addresses, author/name of
book/year of publishing etc should be
shown on the hard copies

21
Experiment 3 - controls

Further reading
student presents a written outline with
details;
 Teacher check student’s understanding
of what is read by asking the student
elaborate his/her thoughts
 Teacher may have to suggest/force change
of topic at this stage if the choice is proved
unrealistic

22
Experiment 3 - outcome

1st draft is marked by the teacher


Impression marking
2nd draft
It is taken as the final version
 All achieved Level 4-5

23
Experiment 3 - students’ sharing
 High
achievers (external & internal
assessments)
 This
task is more difficult and painful
than preparing a tutorial essay
 To prepare a tutorial essay, they are
expected to read 3 pieces of reading
materials; the teacher gave 2 sources.\
 To prepare this SBA task, the teacher
gave no suggestion of references.
24
Experiment 3 - students’ sharing

High achievers

One student handed in the report 2 weeks
late
She refused to give up when data-collection
proved the topic is an unrealistic one although
the teacher persuaded her to.
 Finally she changed topics twice.
 She found it very painful to decide what to
take and what not to take.
 The process caused her negative emotions
and tears.

25
Experiment 3 - students’ sharing

Low achiever (external & internal assessments)
 Her written report (level 4) was much better
than her other essays (level 2) in content
and organization.
 She enjoyed the process because she
chose what she was interested to do and do
it, to a certain extent, at her own pace.
 She said that her self-confidence in
studying History increased. The change is
noticed by the teacher during lessons.
26
What was learnt?
SBA Guide

Be familiar with the SBA Guide
(HKEAA version)





requirement
definition
assessment criteria
elective specific
Title of local heritage studies

NOT in form of a question
27
What was learnt?
Cater for learner diversity

Choosing approach & topic
Very important for success & efficiency in
supervision
 Spend at least 1 month
 Facilitate right matching: student’s
capacity & approach


Which level to achieve?
Set realistic goals
 Very weakly motivated students

To start, consider level 1-2?
 Experiment 3

28
What was learnt?
Time management
 Strong
discipline on time
management
 For
both teachers and students
 Mutual agreed schedule and timer
may help.
 Set
reasonable schedule
 Consider
other learning activities too.
29
What was learnt?
Interim supervision






Helpful in quality control
Make major changes before it is too late
Consider normal lesson time
Train up a few capable students to facilitate
peer learning in class when the teacher is
giving individual supervision during normal
lesson time
Be a good listener when giving supervision
Use guiding questions to help the student to
make decisions
30
Teacher’s worries
 English
version
 inadequate
 According
reading material?
to student’s interest?
 How
much?
 Weak in flexibility
 May lead to ‘great effort, little reward’
31
Teacher’s worries
degree of intervention
 How
much?
 A lot?
 High
marks, weak research skills
 Little?
 Competition
Among students
 Among subject electives
 Among schools

32
Teacher’s worries - justice


Justice?
 Successful plagiarism is very bad
learning experiences
Control
 Citations, footnotes, bibliography
 Show hard copies of reading materials
read
 Ask student to elaborate what was read
during interim supervision
 Others?
33
Teacher’s worries - fairness

Fairness among students



More family resources, higher marks?
Ask more, get more?
Students may have different reasons for
not asking more.
 Lazy?
 Shy?
 Over-confident of oneself?
 Considerate to the teacher?
34
Teacher’s worries - fairness

Control

Choosing approach/title


match individual capacity
Further supervision


equal no. of individual interim
supervision sessions
deliver hard/e-mail copies of teachers’
advice/feedback to all (time-saving; the
same question will not be asked again;
may be used for the next cohort)
35
Conclusion – how much effort?
 SBA
 20% of the final result
 Spend 20% of the total effort
 Make SBA preparation a tool to
prepare students for the written exam
(80% of the final result)
36
Work/ studies
To
nurture life
Not to endanger life
37
Good Health
38