As you know, I've been reading Cook-Sather et al. and I've stumbled upon a few quotes which I find of interest, so I thought I would explore them here.
The first is that they write that 'Our students are not who we were, and in order to challenge, engage and motivate them, we need to respond to who they are as learners' (Cook-Sather et al., 2014). This made me think instantly about my own practice, and how sometimes I do find myself emulating a particular style of teaching that I responded to when I was in school, because I somehow think that what worked for me will work for my students as well. However, I'm starting to see that actually that doesn't work at all; some students might respond to it, but the majority probably won't because they're the product of a different time and place. I really do need to start to listen more to my students, and teach in a way that is reflective of what they want.
Another quote is from a student who was part of a faculty-student partnership. Essentially, they state that the experience helped them grow as a learner because it allowed them to understand a) how they learnt and b) how to better learn from others as a result. It wasn't until they stepped back from their own learning, observing other classes, that they truly began to realise how other people (students and teachers alike) relate to a class. It made me think that maybe we should begin to train students in how to observe lessons, much like what happens when we have formal lesson observations, only perhaps in a less judgemental way. If we had students observe lessons that they were not a part of, and then had them comment on what worked and what didn't work in that lesson for the students who were participating, I bet we could get some really valuable information on improving our practice. However, I reckon that some members of staff would feel uncomfortable with the thought of students evaluating their lessons. That being said, if the observation wasn't necessarily a judgement based on OFSTED criteria, but was instead on how the learners engaged with the lesson, or essentially how they learnt, then perhaps they wouldn't find it as uncomfortable. I don't know, it's just an idea.
Watch this space; I may add more comments as I continue reading throughout the day.
KC
Sunday 29 June 2014
Saturday 28 June 2014
Creating a partnership with students
While I was at the Student Voice conference, I was able to purchase an amazing book by Alison Cook-Sather, Catherine Bovill and Peter Felton (Engaging Students as Parterns in Learning and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty, Jossey-Bass, 2014). I've started to read the book and thought that it would be a good idea if I started to record some of my reflections upon reading it. I don't think I will be able to implement any of the ideas that come to mind until the next academic year, and I fear that if I don't record my thoughts I'll lose them!Basically, I was extremely motivated by all the conversations I overheard and took part in over the course of my day at the conference, not to mention one of the seminars I attended at the final session for my Master's course this year. I am now, more than ever, determine to establish a culture of working collaboratively with students at my school. I think we will be richly rewarded if we make better use of student voice, opposed to some of the 'tokenistic' uses we currently employ. Ideally, I'd like to incorporate the Speak Up program currently used in Ontario (which I learnt about through Jean Courtney) to help establish a school wide students as researchers project within my school. This would be something that is outside of my Masters work, but I feel passionately enough about it to commit myself to making sure it happens. As Cook-Sather et al. state in their book, 'People typically find time for the things they consider most important' (2014).
In terms of how I plan to use students to help me with my thesis, the book has also provided me with much help and guidance. One of the things I was initially concerned about was the ethically based argument that I may be seen to be 'using' the students. While I suppose there might be some element of truth in this, because essentially I want them to help me collect data which I will use in a paper to obtain my Master's degree, I am uncomfortable with the idea of using the students for my own gains. Cook-Sather et al. discuss this by stating that as long as teachers are 'willing to truly share - not give up, but share - power and responsibility...and if [they] stay in open and honest dialogue with students about the processes as well as the outcomes, then they are not liking to think you are experimenting on them' (2014). What I've taken from this is that I need to establish an open and collaborative relationship with the students I plan to involve in my research in order to truly have them feel that they are working with me, and not for me. This shouldn't be too hard, because I am choosing students from my form, which means I've been able to establish a relationship with them over the past four years already. In order for them to feel that they're truly working collaboratively with me, and so that they gain something from the project as well, I am going to be sure to refer to them as my Research Partners in my thesis, and will tell them that they should use the title itself on any CVs or college applications that they write.
To ensure that they are truly research partners, I'd like to get them to not only help me collect my data via interviews, I'd also like to have them help me validate my transcription as well as my codes. I think what I may do is have students conduct the interviews, whilst recording them for later transcription and analysis. I'd then like to show the recorded interviews back to my research partners and ask them to determine what some of the key points (which may then contribute to codes) were. In this way they would be able to analyse and question the interviews that they themselves conducted, helping me to come to better conclusions. I may also encourage them to keep field notes or a blog such as this one, in which they record their initial thoughts after each interview. This would undoubtably provide me with some rich and interesting data to use alongside the recorded interviews. However, I do wonder if perhaps the findings from their field notes could be used as part of a bigger study on using students-as-researchers.... ah, I am getting ahead of myself, and will stop that train of thought there for now.
Another interesting concept is the idea that I need to make sure that, throughout my research, I am not merely using the students to find out what I want, in order to then give it to them. If that's the outcome of my research, then I am doing nothing but fuelling the 'consumerist' culture that exists in many educational settings. Instead, I need to try and use my findings to help challenge and stretch both teachers and learners.
Anyways, these are my initial thoughts based on the first two chapters of the book. I will read some more over the coming weeks, alongside finishing up Essay 2, and provide more updates as and when I feel I have interesting thoughts worth recording.
Until next time!
KC
Wednesday 25 June 2014
Initial reflections on the seminar
I have only one thing to say right now: the culture in schools in the UK needs to change to reflect a more collaborative, co-productive environment which sees students and teachers working together to improve learning. Power should be shared across the board in order to experiment with what works and what doesn't. We need to take risks and not be afraid of making mistakes now and then. Mistakes are where you learn; this needs to be more readily accepted.
Using student voice needs to be part of embedded practice. This idea has been echoed many times throughout the seminar, and I couldn't agree more.
I'm very excited about trying to find a way to establish this sort of culture in my school, but I am aware that it will be a hard slog. I don't even have a position of influence at the minute, to try to bring about such a change. However, I am hoping that people will listen to me, and I'll certainly start to raise my voice on the issue more with 'the powers that be'.
Using student voice needs to be part of embedded practice. This idea has been echoed many times throughout the seminar, and I couldn't agree more.
It's all about starting tiny fires and hoping that they catch on...
I will try to say more on this later, but this is the main issue that has come up for me at this seminar.
Just a note...
Just a quick note -- attending this conference has definitely convinced me that using students as researchers is the way forward. If I want to make use of student voice I should really go big!
KC
KC
Tuesday 24 June 2014
Transcribing and coding number two
Well, as you may already recall, I had previously admitted to cocking things up a bit with my second interview; the camera died about half way through. I have ten questions which I ask each group of students and, unbeknownst to me, the camera died after question six. I was gutted when the interview ended and I noticed that I didn't need to turn the camera off; it had decided to do so itself. I had checked the battery prior to beginning (it said it had over an hour of battery life), so I'm going to ensure that I don't use that camera again. Perhaps it shuts itself off after six or so minutes of 'inaction', or maybe it's just a dud. Whatever the reason, I've noted which camera it was and it shall be retired from my collection.
I spent about an hour and a half transcribing the seven-odd minutes of interview I did manage to record, and another half an hour coding it. It was interesting because many of the themes remain the same across both interviews.
The students seem to like constructive feedback which is clearly individualised and shows that the teacher has engaged with their work. In fact, the two students I interviewed went so far as to say that they appreciate the time some teachers take to read their work thoroughly, providing them with targets that can 'stretch' them.
It's the implications of this comment that are troubling; it implies that not all teachers take the time to thoroughly read through a students work, providing them with impersonal targets that are of little relevance; when this happens, it is clear that the students notice it. Both of the interview sessions I've conducted have seen students share their distaste for whole class targets. This is interesting because it implies that students DO engage with their targets, and even share them with their peers, checking to see whether the comments are the same.
Both groups have also suggested that more time is needed to work with targets, and that clear examples, as well as verbal clarification, would be useful. Having clear boundaries and expectations are also of use, according to the students.
That being said, some new themes emerged as well:
* the students suggested that better training is needed to make self and peer-assessment more useful - the students interviewed felt that this type of feedback wasn't useful because they found it hard to mark the work they've just completed, but suggested that more practice doing this type of work would help them become more comfortable doing it
* cues and guidance, in the form of annotations, would be helpful alongside the two stars and a wish
* annotations should be used more often
Anyways, these are my initial impressions so far. Remember, this blog is meant to serve as my 'field log', so a lot of what I write here is more of a 'train of thought' type thing that I'm doing to help me later in the data analysis process. A lot of the literature that I've read so far has suggested keeping a diary or field journal, and the best way for me to do this is digitally.
The point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't draw too many conclusions from what I've said. I'm just giving some 'fuzzy generalisations' based on the work I've done so far.
Still enjoying the process though, and liking where the journey is taking me.
Next week I'm hoping to have a few student-conducted interviews under my belt. Until then...
KC
I spent about an hour and a half transcribing the seven-odd minutes of interview I did manage to record, and another half an hour coding it. It was interesting because many of the themes remain the same across both interviews.
The students seem to like constructive feedback which is clearly individualised and shows that the teacher has engaged with their work. In fact, the two students I interviewed went so far as to say that they appreciate the time some teachers take to read their work thoroughly, providing them with targets that can 'stretch' them.
It's the implications of this comment that are troubling; it implies that not all teachers take the time to thoroughly read through a students work, providing them with impersonal targets that are of little relevance; when this happens, it is clear that the students notice it. Both of the interview sessions I've conducted have seen students share their distaste for whole class targets. This is interesting because it implies that students DO engage with their targets, and even share them with their peers, checking to see whether the comments are the same.
Both groups have also suggested that more time is needed to work with targets, and that clear examples, as well as verbal clarification, would be useful. Having clear boundaries and expectations are also of use, according to the students.
That being said, some new themes emerged as well:
* the students suggested that better training is needed to make self and peer-assessment more useful - the students interviewed felt that this type of feedback wasn't useful because they found it hard to mark the work they've just completed, but suggested that more practice doing this type of work would help them become more comfortable doing it
* cues and guidance, in the form of annotations, would be helpful alongside the two stars and a wish
* annotations should be used more often
Anyways, these are my initial impressions so far. Remember, this blog is meant to serve as my 'field log', so a lot of what I write here is more of a 'train of thought' type thing that I'm doing to help me later in the data analysis process. A lot of the literature that I've read so far has suggested keeping a diary or field journal, and the best way for me to do this is digitally.
The point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't draw too many conclusions from what I've said. I'm just giving some 'fuzzy generalisations' based on the work I've done so far.
Still enjoying the process though, and liking where the journey is taking me.
Next week I'm hoping to have a few student-conducted interviews under my belt. Until then...
KC
Monday 23 June 2014
Interview number two
I conducted my second interview this morning, this time with two year 8 students. It was still interesting, but because both of the interviewees were girls who are achieving higher levels, I feel this affected their experience and understanding with feedback. I won't say much now as I have a full teaching day, but my initial thoughts are:
KC
- Annotated feedback better
- Like two star and wish
- Frequency should be regular
- Personalised comments
- Examples
- Verbal feedback accompanying
- Explanations of how to improve
- Examples
KC
Friday 20 June 2014
Using Students as Researchers
I've decided that as part of my trial I am going to train 5 members of my form (subject to parental consent and the consent of the students) to be student-researchers, in order to help me to interview some of the younger students, specifically years 7 and 8. I'd like to be able to video record them conducting the interviews without my presence, to see if the responses they get become any more honest or clear when a 'teacher' isn't asking the questions. It will be interesting to compare how the students speak to their peers to how they speak to me. I'll pay particular attention to the body language of the students during the interviews to see if they appear more relaxed and at ease. Using students as researchers has been something I've toyed with for awhile, so I think it would be amiss of me to let this pilot opportunity to pass.
I'll keep you posted on how it goes, but I thought I'd keep you updated on my thought process.
KC
I'll keep you posted on how it goes, but I thought I'd keep you updated on my thought process.
KC
Thursday 19 June 2014
The Pilot - Transcribing and Coding
Gosh, it's been a busy day for me! I spent the afternoon in faculty discussing Essay 2 with my fellow MEd students. It was an interesting afternoon, and I learnt a lot about the various approaches other people are taking; there are so many intelligent people in the program, I sometimes feel like I'm out of my depth! We then were given some time to think about our thesis project, so I took the opportunity to finish transcribing the interview I conducted this morning and begin some coding.
Transcribing is no easy process. I had 11 minutes and 13 seconds of video interview, which I realise now, reading it back, is brief mainly because I failed to chase things up with the students. I've made myself some notes and I know what I need to push next time. I have added to my list of 'prompts' and made a note about phrasing my 'clarification' questions as open questions opposed to the more closed 'Do you agree?' type question that I seemed to use too often this morning.
THIS is why you do pilot interviews - to work out all the kinks before you are doing your proper thesis. I understand that a lot better now. I have a feeling I'm going to learn LOADS throughout this pilot project, and not just information about feedback.
Anyways, it took me over two hours to transcribe the 11 minute interview, no word of a lie. I had a program installed that I was hoping to make use of, but it turns out I only had the trial version and that had expired. Luckily I work with a Mac, so I imported the video into iMovie and slowed down the timing to 75% so that I could transcribe it better. I went for a 'verbatim transcription' approach, where I didn't include any punctuation (beyond what Word autocorrected for me), simply typing what each person said word for word. I also wrote in actions, such as nods, as I feel that using video allowed me to record and acknowledge these sorts of non-verbal responses (yet another reason why using video recordings is a good idea for future interviews).
I then printed and read through the transcript a few times, highlighting and annotating different themes and ideas that popped up. I think this is evidence of using the grounded theory to code my responses, but I could be wrong. I'm still a bit iffy on this. My thinking was that I didn't want to use any codes that have previously been identified and used because I feel it might cloud my judgement when trying to determine themes; instead, I want to try to identify themes as they emerge to me and then see if any of these themes are repeated across my interviews.
The themes that I have identified so far (and these may need tweaking/re-wording) are:
* instructive feedback
* constructive feedback
* examples
* working with targets
* verbal clarification
* clear boundaries and expectations
* timely feedback
* better access to targets
* SPaG/aesthetics
* specific/individualised feedback
I'm going to take this initial transcript (a fresh, un-coded copy) to a colleague at school who has offered to help me triangulate my coding, just to see if I'm on the right track. I'm hoping that he'll come to similar conclusions, but if not then it will be a valuable learning experience, and will help me to create better codes for future interviews.
Anyways, I feel like I've done more than my fair share of work for today. I am now going to power myself off and go to bed. I've had a long day and I deserve a good rest.
Until next time!
KC
Transcribing is no easy process. I had 11 minutes and 13 seconds of video interview, which I realise now, reading it back, is brief mainly because I failed to chase things up with the students. I've made myself some notes and I know what I need to push next time. I have added to my list of 'prompts' and made a note about phrasing my 'clarification' questions as open questions opposed to the more closed 'Do you agree?' type question that I seemed to use too often this morning.
THIS is why you do pilot interviews - to work out all the kinks before you are doing your proper thesis. I understand that a lot better now. I have a feeling I'm going to learn LOADS throughout this pilot project, and not just information about feedback.
Anyways, it took me over two hours to transcribe the 11 minute interview, no word of a lie. I had a program installed that I was hoping to make use of, but it turns out I only had the trial version and that had expired. Luckily I work with a Mac, so I imported the video into iMovie and slowed down the timing to 75% so that I could transcribe it better. I went for a 'verbatim transcription' approach, where I didn't include any punctuation (beyond what Word autocorrected for me), simply typing what each person said word for word. I also wrote in actions, such as nods, as I feel that using video allowed me to record and acknowledge these sorts of non-verbal responses (yet another reason why using video recordings is a good idea for future interviews).
I then printed and read through the transcript a few times, highlighting and annotating different themes and ideas that popped up. I think this is evidence of using the grounded theory to code my responses, but I could be wrong. I'm still a bit iffy on this. My thinking was that I didn't want to use any codes that have previously been identified and used because I feel it might cloud my judgement when trying to determine themes; instead, I want to try to identify themes as they emerge to me and then see if any of these themes are repeated across my interviews.
The themes that I have identified so far (and these may need tweaking/re-wording) are:
* instructive feedback
* constructive feedback
* examples
* working with targets
* verbal clarification
* clear boundaries and expectations
* timely feedback
* better access to targets
* SPaG/aesthetics
* specific/individualised feedback
I'm going to take this initial transcript (a fresh, un-coded copy) to a colleague at school who has offered to help me triangulate my coding, just to see if I'm on the right track. I'm hoping that he'll come to similar conclusions, but if not then it will be a valuable learning experience, and will help me to create better codes for future interviews.
Anyways, I feel like I've done more than my fair share of work for today. I am now going to power myself off and go to bed. I've had a long day and I deserve a good rest.
Until next time!
KC
The Pilot Interview - After
Wow! I am buzzing! That was such an amazing experience, and it was only my first one. I know I made a few mistakes, but as soon as I made them I knew what I'd done wrong. I will learn from this initial session immensely, in terms of how I ask my questions. I may have led some of their responses, but I think I did it in a fairly accidental way in my quest to find clarity. That is an area I will work on.
Some brief things I found:
- students don't always like having the two stars - some find it pointless
- students weren't always able to work immediately with their feedback to improve, although the ones that did found it very helpful
- some students felt that longer targets would be helpful, especially if they were constructive
- individual targets are better than ones set for the whole class
- students would like to have specific examples or prompts to help them
- students would sometimes prefer more wishes than stars
- students need more clear signposts for what the teacher is looking for when marking - all three felt that teachers only mark for spelling, punctuation and grammar
- they'd like a checklist or grid which suggested up to 5 specific things teachers are looking for on each assessment, as well as having each specific learning goal broken down into 'at level four this looks like', 'at level 5 this looks like'
- not all students felt that peer and self assessment was useful
- all students felt that the two star and a wish policy was an improvement on their previous feedback in English
Obviously these are just my initial thoughts after the interview. I will need to transcribe and then code their actual responses to draw out more specific details. I will then need to interview other students and see what comes up across the different groups.
So far, a lot of what they said has matched the literature, which is interesting. Not many actually mentioned specific levels either, which might be something worth exploring. I wonder if I should include a specific question on what they prefer: constructive feedback or levels. Although perhaps that would be too leading - the questions at the minute allow them to mention levels if they'd like, and they sometimes did, but they never specifically mentioned levels when describing what elements helped them most.
All in all, it was a great first experience and I look forward to learning more in my next interview.
Some brief things I found:
- students don't always like having the two stars - some find it pointless
- students weren't always able to work immediately with their feedback to improve, although the ones that did found it very helpful
- some students felt that longer targets would be helpful, especially if they were constructive
- individual targets are better than ones set for the whole class
- students would like to have specific examples or prompts to help them
- students would sometimes prefer more wishes than stars
- students need more clear signposts for what the teacher is looking for when marking - all three felt that teachers only mark for spelling, punctuation and grammar
- they'd like a checklist or grid which suggested up to 5 specific things teachers are looking for on each assessment, as well as having each specific learning goal broken down into 'at level four this looks like', 'at level 5 this looks like'
- not all students felt that peer and self assessment was useful
- all students felt that the two star and a wish policy was an improvement on their previous feedback in English
Obviously these are just my initial thoughts after the interview. I will need to transcribe and then code their actual responses to draw out more specific details. I will then need to interview other students and see what comes up across the different groups.
So far, a lot of what they said has matched the literature, which is interesting. Not many actually mentioned specific levels either, which might be something worth exploring. I wonder if I should include a specific question on what they prefer: constructive feedback or levels. Although perhaps that would be too leading - the questions at the minute allow them to mention levels if they'd like, and they sometimes did, but they never specifically mentioned levels when describing what elements helped them most.
All in all, it was a great first experience and I look forward to learning more in my next interview.
The Pilot Interview - Before
Well, I'm going to conduct my first pilot interview today, with three year 9 students. I am quite excited and a little bit nervous. I've never interviewed anyone before, much less students. I'm going to ask them questions which are very similar to ones I plan to use for my thesis research, only with a more English specific focus, as the results of this pilot will be used as part of my Performance Management for the year. It will be an interesting process, because I will have to start coding the responses and eventually write a report which I will have to deliver to my head of Department.
Exciting times.
I'm also, in the name of scientific experiment, going to be trying a variety of approaches to recording and capturing the interviews. I've got a video camera set up today to record the interview, and I'll experiment with placement of the camera a few times throughout the process to see which works best. I'll also use audio recording devices, first separately and then perhaps along side video recording, just to see which works best for collecting, using and analysing the data.
I've got some free time this afternoon as well, where I will hopefully be able to write about my experiences this morning. Wish me luck!
Exciting times.
I'm also, in the name of scientific experiment, going to be trying a variety of approaches to recording and capturing the interviews. I've got a video camera set up today to record the interview, and I'll experiment with placement of the camera a few times throughout the process to see which works best. I'll also use audio recording devices, first separately and then perhaps along side video recording, just to see which works best for collecting, using and analysing the data.
I've got some free time this afternoon as well, where I will hopefully be able to write about my experiences this morning. Wish me luck!
Wednesday 4 June 2014
The First Draft Response
You have no idea how happy I was to complete my first draft only three days after my first blog post. Dutifully, I spent the remainder of that day completing my research (or my research thus far), and then the two following days typing up the paper. I knew as I was typing that I was forgetting things, such as concrete citations for all of the facts about theory I had read earlier in the research process, but I knew that I could add those in later, after a quick skim through my notes.
Overall, I was concerned with getting the 'critical review' part of the paper done; the part that actually required me to think and analyse, interpreting the strengths and weaknesses of a peer reviewed paper, thus proving that I had come to terms with the terminology and language surrounding educational research.
I must admit that I am not 100% there. I still can't confidently tell you about the difference between methodology and methods (which my supervisor pointed out in her feedback - I'm working on it). I know more about doing phenomenological studies, as that's the type of study I want to do. I can also tell you about ethnography, ethics, and methods of qualitative and quantitative data collection. Ask me about triangulation, validity, reliability, and I will totally be able to fill you in. Ask me about trustworthiness though, and I'll fall short (yet another area highlighted by my supervisor, I mighty add).
Clearly I still have some way to go, but I'm not at all intimidated by what remains. I know I can find the information I need. I probably have the sources in my house, having bought many of the texts myself; I'm a pack rat, and I love a good textbook on my shelves. In fact, I've even been known to re-read them purely for pleasure. Yep...I'm a sucker for knowledge.
After submitting the paper to my supervisor, I did a dance around my house. I was extremely pleased with myself, and I wanted everyone to know. My boyfriend got an earful of my whoops and hurrahs when he got home from work, and I'm sure he thought I was insane. I almost felt like cracking open some wine to toast myself, but seeing as I had to attend a fitness camp shortly after submitting, that didn't seem like a good idea. Counter-productive on more than one front, really.
I knew I was going to get feedback on the work, feedback that would highlight my inadequacies, but somehow that didn't bother me because I already knew what they were. When I did receive the paper back, heavily marked up with suggestions and a few brief moments of praise (which I lapped up eagerly), I was both pleased and relieved to see that she had only, as I had thought, picked up on the areas that I already knew I hadn't fleshed out. I was again extremely relieved. In fact, I'm still feeling confident now, which is nice. I hope it lasts.
I've got a one to one supervision tomorrow, where we get to talk through the paper in person. I'm going to spend an hour before hand going over things, adding things in, and generality try and tackle some of her suggestions head on.
Overall, positive things happening at the minute! Nothing more to report, so I shall end here.
KC
Overall, I was concerned with getting the 'critical review' part of the paper done; the part that actually required me to think and analyse, interpreting the strengths and weaknesses of a peer reviewed paper, thus proving that I had come to terms with the terminology and language surrounding educational research.
I must admit that I am not 100% there. I still can't confidently tell you about the difference between methodology and methods (which my supervisor pointed out in her feedback - I'm working on it). I know more about doing phenomenological studies, as that's the type of study I want to do. I can also tell you about ethnography, ethics, and methods of qualitative and quantitative data collection. Ask me about triangulation, validity, reliability, and I will totally be able to fill you in. Ask me about trustworthiness though, and I'll fall short (yet another area highlighted by my supervisor, I mighty add).
Clearly I still have some way to go, but I'm not at all intimidated by what remains. I know I can find the information I need. I probably have the sources in my house, having bought many of the texts myself; I'm a pack rat, and I love a good textbook on my shelves. In fact, I've even been known to re-read them purely for pleasure. Yep...I'm a sucker for knowledge.
After submitting the paper to my supervisor, I did a dance around my house. I was extremely pleased with myself, and I wanted everyone to know. My boyfriend got an earful of my whoops and hurrahs when he got home from work, and I'm sure he thought I was insane. I almost felt like cracking open some wine to toast myself, but seeing as I had to attend a fitness camp shortly after submitting, that didn't seem like a good idea. Counter-productive on more than one front, really.
I knew I was going to get feedback on the work, feedback that would highlight my inadequacies, but somehow that didn't bother me because I already knew what they were. When I did receive the paper back, heavily marked up with suggestions and a few brief moments of praise (which I lapped up eagerly), I was both pleased and relieved to see that she had only, as I had thought, picked up on the areas that I already knew I hadn't fleshed out. I was again extremely relieved. In fact, I'm still feeling confident now, which is nice. I hope it lasts.
I've got a one to one supervision tomorrow, where we get to talk through the paper in person. I'm going to spend an hour before hand going over things, adding things in, and generality try and tackle some of her suggestions head on.
Overall, positive things happening at the minute! Nothing more to report, so I shall end here.
KC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)