Teaching Portfolio
261009
Mike Richardson
Philosophy
Teaching is enjoyable because, as Francis Bacon once wrote in Religious
Meditations Of Heresies 1597
“ Knowledge is Power ”
I like the idea of empowering people through knowledge.
Philosophy
During my time at Curtin, a number of teaching / learning issues have been identified in my
teaching are (architectural building technology):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
students tend not to integrate information across units
the current course content has experienced slippage
the credit point system is somewhat confusing
units have been added ad hoc without reference to a learning framework
there is no overall course philosophy or conscious distinctive for architecture at Curtin
students are “learning to the test”
My response to these issues is a teaching strategy based on the following concepts:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
start with the basics and move to the detailed
practical tasks are effectively taught using the 5 point Demonstration Method
the five points of good exegesis
Cognitive Flexibility Theory
http://tip.psychology.org/spiro.html
Lateral Thinking (De Bono’s ideas about water logic)
http://tip.psychology.org/debono.html
Record
Date
Employment
Unit
Responsibilities
2009
additional pro
rata, Curtin
3rd Year Building
Technology, Sem 1
Unit, coordinator, lecturing, tutoring, assessment
2008
additional pro
rata, Curtin
3rd Year IA Technical
Studies, Sem 2
Unit, coordinator, lecturing, tutoring, assessment
2007 2009
Half time
contract Curtin
1st Year Building
Technology
Unit Coordinator, lecturing, tutoring , assessment
2nd & 3rd Year Building
Technology
tutoring , assessment
5th Year Dissertation
Supervising and assessing architectural thesis
students
2006
Sessional
Curtin
1st Year Building
Technology, Sem 2
Unit, coordinator, lecturing, tutoring, assessment
2000 2006
Sessional
Curtin
1st Year Building
Technology
tutoring , assessment, one proxy lecture
2002
Sessional
Curtin
1st Year Design, Sem 2
tutoring , assessment
2002
Sessional
UWA
1st Year Design, Sem 1
tutoring, design and implementation of a project
module, assessment
2001
Sessional
UWA
2nd year Technology &
Structures, Sem 1
site inspections, workshop supervision,
assessment
Record
Other teaching experience:
- regular lay preaching and leading engagements over the last 23 years
- 12 years home schooling
- supervision of approximately 10 work experience students
- off shore course moderation LUCT Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
- 2 guest appearances for the Curtin ‘Brown Bag’ lecture series
- guest lecture, UWA Mechanical Engineering, Design Lecture Series
- designed and delivered a 10 part music appreciation series
- 2 informal presentations to LUCT architectural staff, Malaysia
- input into the Curtin 2010 Architectural Practice and Technology stream
review
Innovation
Introduction of the Sugar Cube Tower project as part of my Building
Technology 101 Unit coordination role, a BT 101 student now holds the
world record for the tallest sugar cube tower.
Integration of Spatial Science personnel to the Sugar Cube Tower project
Introduction of the FAT BEV SWAM acronym and chart to BT 301 as a
way of assessing the design of architectural details. A copy of this chart
was requested by a member of the Architectural Accreditation Council of
Australia.
Practice
In this section I expand on the 5 point strategy cited under Philosophy.
The 2010 course review has given immediacy to my personal analysis.
The following points have application in each unit as well as across the six
semesters which currently make up the technology component of the
undergraduate course
Start with the basics and move to the detailed
This idea is basic and universal to all teaching, you can’t walk until you’ve crawled, and you can’t
run until you’ve walked. It is a reasonably obvious learning strategy, and is evident in the current
architecture course.
I think this strategy should be retained.
Implementation? As with
many complex systems,
understanding is a process of
refinement. Building Science
and technology is divided into
successively smaller
subgroups as the course
unfolds. For example, to start
with all buildings are defined
in terms of 3 structural
systems; solid, skeletal and
surface. At the end of the
course we examine structures
in terms of the acronymic
sentence; FAT BEV SWAM,
10 principles of good detailing
Basic
Detailed
Start with the basics and move to the detailed - example
From the BT 102 Unit Outline …
Practical tasks are effectively taught using the 5 point Demonstration Method
There is some dispute over the word “Practice”, but I think it is an appropriate word because it
conveys the intent of the stream, that is:
to equip students with a set of practical skills
to concentrate on the practicalities of building
to put theories into practice
to actually build models
and to get out on site
The Demonstration Method ipso facto
concerns itself with teaching by
demonstrating. In this application, I extend
the definition to include the 5 point technique
for transferring practical skills as follows:
teacher
exp
dem / exp
dem / exp
dem / exp
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Teacher explains (ideally demonstrates)
Teacher demonstrates and explains
Teacher demonstrates, student explains
Student demonstrates and explains
Student does
dem
student
Practical tasks are effectively taught using the 5 point Demonstration Method
Implementation?
A real shortfall of the course is lack of office experience, this might also amount to a lack of
context in which to make sense of information learnt. Practice helps give context, as it demands
cogency - the laws of physics are not forgiving. With regard to (say) drafting working drawings,
a task likely to fill the time of a young architectural employee, we can begin to give context by
painting credible scenarios which include execution of the practical component being taught.
S1 define working drawings, their purpose, how they are used, show examples
S2 invent a scenario and do a simple working drawing in class explaining as you go
S3 invent a scenario and do a simple working drawing in class asking questions as you go
the emphasis being on student input
S4 using a construction system such as Lego or Meccano, get students to design and
document a simple structure. Students swap drawings and build off the plans, the
designer’s intention and the builder’s outcome are compared
S5 Students document part of a current project, they are given the actual design drawings
and are required to work with actual consultants to produce a result which is compared
to the actual outcome
S6 students undertake a major project integrated across the streams
5 point Demonstration Method - example
In class working drawing exercise Lecture 10 BT 102 2009:
http://dbs.ilectures.curtin.edu.au/lectopia/lectopia.lasso?ut=1879&id=36274
The five points of good exegesis
A cross disciplinary idea, that uses the analogy of
language to guide teaching. I believe there is a certain
appropriateness here because the complexities of
language have a strong parallel with the complexities of
architecture. Acquiring and understanding language
can be divided into five categories:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
vocabulary (learning the words)
literacy (putting the words together in useful ways)
history / context (development and subtleties)
expansion / synthesis (the broadening)
test / practice (what results from the language)
As a teaching strategy, this has semester by
semester application, as well as course wide
application, with an emphasis on vocabulary
at the beginning, and an emphasis on
practice toward the end of the course
V
L
H
E
T
V
L
H
E
T
The five points of good exegesis
Implementation?
This process has a course long cycle, as well as a semester long cycle.
1. vocabulary (learning the words)
In any field of endeavor there are associated words. Teachers must be sure to define each new word as it is introduced, the basic aim
here is to increase the number of words students have available to describe architecture
2. literacy (putting the words together in useful ways)
A horrible tendency in architecture is to use the vocabulary inappropriately or in jargonistic ways. In literacy, we are trying both
metaphorically and literally to learn about types of words, word patterns, sentence structure, etc. With reference to building technology
this might include suites of details, modes of construction, all with a strong focus on how it has been done successfully in the past (the
grammar rules already exist)
3. history / context (development and subtleties)
A development of literacy is to understand context, in short it is the history component of learning, influences outside the field of study
can have a dramatic impact on the development of that field. In building technology, this could be the iron / steel manufacturing
process.
4.
expansion / synthesis (the broadening)
In language, we might be talking about current trends, psychology, editing, broadcasting etc. In Building Technology we would explore
similar issues with a strong emphasis on producing actual examples.
5.
test / practice (what results from the language)
What is learnt must be tested in appropriate ways, how will our drawings be read? Will the proposed detail serve its purpose? This
requires strong alignment with ‘real world’ situations.
The five points of good exegesis - example
A rough outline of the components comprising the 3 Building Technology units I have
coordinated over the last 3 years showing the shifting focus from vocabulary to practice
Cognitive Flexibility Theory
An idea developed by Spiro, Feltovitch & Coulson, it has particular application to complex or ill
structured subjects, and has been applied in the past to literary comprehension, history, biology
and medicine. I think it has potential for architecture
1.
Learning activities must provide multiple
representations of content.
2.
Instructional materials should avoid
oversimplifying the content domain and
support context-dependent knowledge.
3.
Instruction should be case-based and
emphasize knowledge construction, not
transmission of information.
4.
Knowledge sources should be highly
interconnected rather than
compartmentalized.
Cognitive Flexibility Theory
Implementation
1. Learning activities must provide multiple representations of content.
One of the things that came out of our stream meeting at LUCT was the idea that information would be better
remembered, reinforced and contextualized if it was repeatedly presented. The parcelling of information into discrete
packages, while making things neat, does not seem to foster integration.
2. Instructional materials should avoid oversimplifying the content domain and support context-dependent knowledge.
Academia tends to enjoy context independent knowledge, with the fast pace of technological development, context can
quickly be lost. Loss of context means loss of teaching effectiveness. I think we owe students constant context based
teaching, assignments and tests. This is one of the things Tone Wheeler emphasized with the regard to ESD and, I
suspect, is good advice for all aspects of architecture
3. Instruction should be case-based and emphasize knowledge construction, not transmission of information.
Another point that was quickly highlighted at the LUCT meeting. There appeared to be general support for year wide
project based learning, this seems to give scope for knowledge construction, as it can be directly related to the
architectural / building construction process.
4. Knowledge sources should be highly interconnected rather than compartmentalized.
There has been discussion about the multiple lecturer model with reference to project based learning. Having different
lecturers, with different expertise lecture about the same project would seem to highlight the intergrated approach.
Basically, if lecturers can model integration, students will most likely follow.
Cognitive Flexibility Theory - example
1.
2.
3.
4.
multiple representations of content - 3 built assignments
context-dependent knowledge - since structure is built, building provides appropriate context
Instruction should be case-based and emphasize knowledge construction - how does one go about this task?
Knowledge sources should be highly interconnected rather than compartmentalized - the multifaceted design brief
Cognitive Flexibility Theory - example
Interior Architects Technical Studies 322 Meccano Module 2008
Design, Document and Construct a chair using the components of Meccano Multi Model 7
Lateral Thinking (Rock Logic & Water Logic)
De Bono contrasts rock logic with water logic, a way of thinking about things that can help
students entertain opposing views or requirements simultaneously. This type of thinking as a
foundational idea for teaching, would encourage all teachers to dissolve the fortifications often
built around their ‘own’ units. Below is an all too brief introduction to water logic:
Johnny was a young boy who lived in Australia. One day his friends offered him a choice between a one dollar coin
and a two dollar coin. In Australia the one dollar coin is considerably larger than the two dollar coin. Johnny took the
one dollar coin. His friends giggled and laughed and reckoned Johnny very stupid because he did not yet know that
the smaller coin was worth twice as much as the bigger coin. Whenever they wanted to demonstrate Johnny's
stupidity they would repeat the exercise. Johnny never seemed to learn.
One day a bystander felt sorry for Johnny and beckoning him over, the bystander explained that the smaller coin
was actually worth twice as much as the larger coin.
Johnny listened politely, then he said: 'Yes, I do know that. But how many times would they have offered me the
coins if I had taken the two dollar coin the first time?'
A computer which has been programmed to select value would have had to choose the two dollar coin the first time
around. It was Johnny's human 'perception' that allowed him to take a different and longer-term view: the
possibility of repeat business, the possibility of several more one dollar coins. Of course, it was a risk and the
perception was very complex: how often would he see his friends? Would they go on using the same game? Would
they want to go on losing one dollar coins, etc.?
There are two points about this story which are relevant to this book.
The first point is the great importance of human perception, and that is what this book is about. Perception is rather
different from our traditional concept of logic.
The second point arising from the story is the difference between the thinking of Johnny and the thinking of the
computer. The thinking of the computer would be based on 'is'. The computer would say to itself: 'Which of the two
coins "is" the most valuable?' As a result the computer would choose the smaller, two dollar coin. The thinking of
Johnny was not based on 'is' but on 'to': 'What will this lead to?' 'What will happen if I take the one dollar coin?'
Traditional rock logic is based on 'is'. The logic of perception is water logic and this is based on 'to'.
•http://homepage.mac.com/bobembry/studio/biz/conceptual_resources/authors/edward_de_bono/water_logic.html
Lateral Thinking (Rock Logic & Water Logic) - example
A way of marking
107 cm - 107%
Effectiveness
Evaluate results for BT 101 2009 were positive (overall score 98%)
which was a marked improvement from 2008, and the highest score for
first year units in AIA (Architecture and Interior Architecture) S1 2009
A few student quotes from the report:
Mike was a fantastic lecturer. He found a good balance between simplifying theory for students
who have no knowledge of physics, and asking in depth questions to engage those who have.
Mike's lectures are very informative and he also adds a bit of humor to the class, this, in my
opinion helps my learning experience
I enjoyed going to lectures and tutorials this semester. I found Mike Richardson’s encouraging
and interesting antics throughout lectures educational, he relayed points of information to the
class using props and different methods other than speech to teach us important aspects of
building technology.
Scholarship
I draw heavily on my own educational experience and the knowledge required
to practice architecture. Many anecdotes, images, and experiences from
recent practice can be found in my lecture material. I’ve also found industry
contacts to be very useful when organising guest lecturers and tutors for
building technology units.
Reflection
I like to comment on each unit I have coordinated once it is all over, to remind
me, or inform my successor about the effective and not so effective aspects of
the teaching / learning experience: (written in red on the UO cover sheet)
Reflection
Teaching Observation
I am particularly pleased that the
observer picked up on these three
elements that made the lecture
enjoyable, this confirms my suspicion
that they are important
Getting students to engage has been
an abiding challenge, especially with
over 100 students. Towards the end of
semester student questions and
answers have become easier to solicit
hopefully the result of my conscious
effort not to ridicule wrong answers
I am now familiar with the document
camera, and it has increased the scope
for lecture content and design (see the
slide referring to the in class working
drawing exercise)
Reflection
Teaching Observation
One thing that alarmed me was low
lecture attendance, aside from the first
and last lectures I seemed to have
around 50% attendance, much lower
than I expected.
My observer helped me realize that I
need to give time for students to
answer questions, especially those that
require some calculations, I need to
better design how (or more importantly)
when questions are asked and answers
are expected.
Reflection
Teaching Observation
I got off to a bad start, mostly due to the
fact that I was finishing the previous
week’s lecture, without a proper
introduction, I had trouble getting
student’s attention, I should have
started with an anecdote or something
A two hour lecture is very long, I have
resolved to include a change of pace
every 20 minutes or so, I already have
a break after one hour.
I need to summarize the whole lecture
better
Reflection
Teaching Observation
See previous comment about
beginning the lecture.
I think it worth while doing at least one
demonstration during a lecture, in this
particular lecture I did not have a
demonstration, and it made a difference
END