Being subject-centred: A philosophy of teaching and implications for higher education

Being subject-centred as a higher education teacher offers a rich and illuminating philosophical and practical understanding of learning. Building upon previous research on subject-centred learning, we draw on reflection, literature review and a phenomenological approach to show how our ways of being infuse the teaching and learning environment. Philosophically, it is our way of being with our subject as teachers that influences the learning within our students. We show how posing the question: 'What is the best way to teach this subject?' helps a teacher find the best way to enhance the learning experience. It entails moving away from reliance solely on approaches that simply 're-present' content, such as lectures and online learning management systems, to interactive classrooms where space is created for the students to enter into their own engagement with the subject in a shared pursuit with the teacher, resulting in more effective teaching and learning. We illustrate this with personal accounts of our own journeys as teachers. We acknowledge that it takes courage to teach and to fully be subject-centred in the face of prevailing trends and pressures for other ways of teaching currently prominent in the higher education sector. But, ultimately, it is who we are as teachers that matters most, and being subject-centred provides the most effective way for us to most meaningfully reach our students

CoRes as tools for promoting pedagogical content knowledge of novice science teachers

Expert science teachers possess a special blend of science content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge for teaching particular science topics to particular groups of students that is built up over time and experience. This form of professional knowledge, termed pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) by Shulman (1987), is topic-specific, unique to each science teacher, and can only be gained through teaching practice. The academic construct of PCK is a recognition that teaching is not simply the transmission of concepts and skills from teacher to students but, rather, a complex and problematic activity that requires many and varied ‘on the spot’ decisions and responses to students’ ongoing learning needs. Much has been written about the nature of PCK since Shulman first introduced the concept in 1987, and its elusive characteristics have led to much debate

Making Assessment Meaningful

Our investigation highlighted practical implications and barriers for implementing assessment for formative purpose. With larger student numbers it is becoming harder for academics to find the time to engage in formative assessment. It seems a shame that as class sizes grow it is at the cost of the learning experience in terms of formative feedback. So whilst our respondents showed a commitment to using assessment for formative purposes, practical reasons may prevent this from actually happening. As an institution we also need to be looking at assessment timing. If assessment is to be formative, it needs to happen at a time when students can then act on feedback in a constructive way. We also need to be creating activities that allow students to engage with the feedback: simply handing students a page of written feedback will not encourage all students to act and learn. Creating discussion during teaching time, following assessment, for students to talk about the feedback will encourage them to read and reflect on any feedback. It is clear that assessment for formative purpose is at the heart of most lecturers’ practice within London Metropolitan University, but now we need to place it firmly at the heart of the student experience, in a meaningful and real way

Hacking Smart Machines with Smarter Ones: How to Extract Meaningful Data from Machine Learning Classifiers

Machine Learning (ML) algorithms are used to train computers to perform a variety of complex tasks and improve with experience. Computers learn how to recognize patterns, make unintended decisions, or react to a dynamic environment. Certain trained machines may be more effective than others because they are based on more suitable ML algorithms or because they were trained through superior training sets. Although ML algorithms are known and publicly released, training sets may not be reasonably ascertainable and, indeed, may be guarded as trade secrets. While much research has been performed about the privacy of the elements of training sets, in this paper we focus our attention on ML classifiers and on the statistical information that can be unconsciously or maliciously revealed from them. We show that it is possible to infer unexpected but useful information from ML classifiers. In particular, we build a novel meta-classifier and train it to hack other classifiers, obtaining meaningful information about their training sets. This kind of information leakage can be exploited, for example, by a vendor to build more effective classifiers or to simply acquire trade secrets from a competitor's apparatus, potentially violating its intellectual property rights

Paraphrases and summaries: A means of clarification or a vehicle for articulating a preferred version of student accounts?

The use of group discussions as a means to facilitate learning from experiences is well documented in adventure education literature. Priest and Naismith (1993) assert that the use of the circular discussion method, where the leader poses questions to the participants, is the most common form of facilitation in adventure education. This paper draws on transcripts of facilitation sessions to argue that the widely advocated practice of leader summaries or paraphrases of student responses in these sessions functions as a potential mechanism to control and sponsor particular knowledge(s). Using transcripts from recorded facilitation sessions the analysis focuses on how the leader paraphrases the students’ responses and how these paraphrases or ‘formulations’ function to modify or exclude particular aspects of the students’ responses. I assert that paraphrasing is not simply a neutral activity that merely functions to clarify a student response, it is a subtle means by which the leader of the session can, often inadvertently or unknowingly, alter the student’s reply with the consequence of favouring particular knowledge(s). Revealing the subtle work that leader paraphrases perform is of importance for educators who claim to provide genuine opportunities for students to learn from their experience