You are on page 1of 7

Page |1

Assessment and Analysis Portfolio Paper
WFED 495 C2
Jason Fogleman

Page |2

On this paper we will discuss the five teaching strategies. These five strategies are case study,
simulation, brainstorming, problem solving, and special projects. Along with these you have
action/interaction strategies which include direct instruction, indirect instruction, experiential
learning, independent study and interactive instruction. I will focus mainly on the three strategies
I used in my classroom, these three strategies being direct instruction, case study, and special
projects. These approaches seem to best fit the information we were covering at the time.

Page |3

The three main instructional strategies I used this semester were direct instruction, case
study, and special project. Direct instruction I feel is the back bone for teaching in a CTE setting.
A lot of the tasks we need to cover in Precision Machine Technology are done by following a
specific set of steps in order to achieve the correct end results.
Terminology is another topic that is covered with a lot of detail in Precision Machine
Technology Without direct instruction this would be more difficult to accomplish. The lesson I
used direct instruction on was a lesson on file classification. Teaching the various types and
classifications of files and their related uses is most efficiently taught using direct instruction
The next instructional method I used after direct instruction was case study. I was a little
nervous about trying this method at first. Once the students started working on the project I
really started to like the results I was getting. I used case study on a pre-drill and ream lesson I
presented. Many times we only teach the correct way of doing a task and never provide an
opportunity for the students to see what can happen when the proper steps are not followed. I set
the case study up to provide such an opportunity. Once the students completed the case study
they came to me and said they felt like they understood topics better and how they relate back to
different operations other than reaming.
The third method used after case study was special project. Special projects seem to be
what I reach for the most in the Precision Machine Technology program. I will teach the students
all the information needed to complete the task, give them a special project in order for them to
hone their skills and gain a deeper knowledge on the topic. Without the special projects to work
on students many never truly understand what they did, how they did it or why it is important to
follow exact procedures.

Page |4

On the files classifications lesson the objective was: given a lecture and power point
presentation, the students will correctly identify hand files, with 100% accuracy. Assessment for
this lesson covered about two weeks. I started assessing in the summary of the lesson through a
student lead recap. After the recap I held up different files and made each student identify that
file. All responses were good with some being slower than others. As the students started to work
on a filing task you could see them experiment with the different files. They soon demonstrated a
deeper understanding of which files were best for roughing and which files worked best for
finishing.
On the pre-drill and reaming lesson the objective was: given a lecture and power point
presentation, hand-outs, and a lab project, the students will pre-drill and ream holes, with 100%
accuracy. Assessment was done after about a week long shop project. I set certain criteria for
holes which the students would need to ream. The students had to ream nine holes all the same
size in a blank of material. By changing the criteria for each hole the results or the size of the
holes varied. Once the students completed their work they had to write a short paper on their
individual findings. By hitting a task in this manner the students gained a lot of knowledge not
only on reaming but on other hole making tasks as well.
On the counter boring and spot facing lesson the objective was; Given a lecture, power
point presentation, hand-outs, and a lab project, the students will counter bore and spot face, with
80% accuracy. Assessment was done through a special shop project geared toward the task of
counter boring. Students liked working on a specific task and gaining experience on that task. A
lot of times students just need time to practice doing the work. This project proved just that. The
first couple holes each student worked on were out of tolerance but as they continued with the
project their work started to come into tolerance.

Page |5

As for whether or not the goals were met, I would say, yes. At the end of all the lessons
presented, the students walked away with valuable knowledge and skills. Some students gained
more than others but that is education. Not all students retain all the information. Not all students
learn in the same manner. This is why we try and change up our teaching methods, to see what
works with different students.
The lessons presented were presented to first year students or second year students. Both
levels only have white teenage male students. These students seem to have very similar learning
styles. All of them seem to enjoy and get the most out of project based learning.
The educational environment in which these lessons occur was mainly in a shop or lab
setting. Before each project got started we sit the students down in a quiet classroom setting. We
directly instruct them on what is need for the project to be productive. We give the students the
theory behind what they are about to do then let them complete the project.
The student’s responses were all positive. I cannot stress enough how a group of students
can change from one year to the next. For these lessons I can say the students worked well,
communicated well together, contributed well as a group, one student that sat back and would
not say much was pulled into the group. The other students brought him out of his shell, I cannot
say anything negative here.
When reviewing my personal feedback as well as the student feedback they are aligned.
The file lesson is good to go, no modifications are needed. The pre-drill and ream lesson would
benefit from a few changes. First a clearer blueprint of what I was looking for in the part layout,
in the future I will follow that project up with one for them to ream various hole sizes to further
hone their skills. The counter boring lesson requires one major improvement additional tooling

Page |6

for the students to work with must be obtained. I have a minimal amount of counter bore tools
This makes this task tough. I will be looking at correcting this issue by next year when we do
these tasks again. Specific actions would include buying more tooling and producing a clear
blueprint for the task.
When incorporating other instructional strategies and teaching methods I would focus on
coming up with clear ways of assessing them. While developing student projects, I will attempt
to predict what students will do wrong or need to do to complete the project. I guess the biggest
difference will be to try and diversify. Never let them get bored with their learning. Projects
where multiple means of presenting information, of assessing student work, providing
meaningful practice to hone these skills will keep students engage with their work.
The overall impression of the instructional strategies used in this course is good. A lot of
the strategies I have already incorporated, without the terminology. In my mind good teaching is
good teaching no matter what strategies you are using. The point is, understanding what
strategies are out there to use can really drive the quality of lessons you produce. There is no one
size fits all strategy. Diversify, spice it up, and give your students something to look forward to.
With that said there are topics out there that require certain teaching strategies in order for the
students to gain mastery of the tasks. Bottom line is I need to learn more about teaching
strategies and completely understand how to apply them. This will only come with time.
The strategy that surprised me the most was the case study project. I also was the most
nervous about this project but got the best results from it as well. I was surprised at the fact
students tied it back to issues they had last year. Students commented that if we would have done
a project like this on the manual lathes surface speed would not have given them so much grief.

Page |7

When I hear comments like that it makes me think about how can I incorporate a case study into
the first year’s program and when should it be done.
The process of doing the lesson went smooth. Students gained knowledge and skills in
the trade. In the end that is truly what matters. The students I currently have chew up the
shop/lab projects and want to learn. Coming up with the theory or what I call the information
dump is the area that needs the most work. Current students I have do struggle with
understanding the theory. With this in mind finding the key to unlock the door for my students in
this area will be tough. What I am finding right know is that students that learn by doing struggle
with learning through theory.
I will continue to use the various teaching strategies throughout my lesson plan building
process. I plan on building multiple means of presenting information and multiple means of
presenting shop/lab projects. I plan on experimenting on each new set of students to find the
method that works best for each specific group of students.
In closing the process of learning these strategies was fun and enjoyable. Learning about
new and older strategies will be interesting as well. Diversifying my instruction will keep it
interesting for the students. At this time that is the only way I see to keep them engaged in the
learning process.