Posts: 311
Threads: 289
Joined: Sep 2019
09-15-2023, 03:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-16-2023, 03:17 PM by CALIS.)
Thank you for participating in TIRP service-learning outreach!
Your reports are the basis for academic credit. Whether or not you are seeking a credit option, reports are required as a university record of service-learning efforts and impact in local schools.
Required Format:
Session 1 materials: [The first line of your report is the session number and full title of the database item(s).]
Focus Q: [On a new line, list your focus question from your TAP form. If you changed the question then add the new version after the TAP version.]
*** For the minimum of 3 student specifics, do not refer to students by name; instead call them Student A, B or C.
*** For the minimum of 500 words, guiding questions are here: https://www.forums.usc-calis.net/showthread.php?tid=297
Use clear paragraph structure. If you include too much focus on the step-by-step process of the lesson rather than substance, you may be asked to revise your report.
*** The webboard is public. If you include names, commentary or observations, you will need to revise your post.
To Post:
1. For each report, select Post Reply. ( Do not select New Topic)
2. Copy/paste from your Word file and save a copy until after the semester is over.
3. Before pasting, confirm that you have met the minimum of at least 500 words.
4. Each report must be submitted by midnight within 3 calendar days after each session.
A CALIS staff member will review your report each week and post a message below of the scoring for your performance evaluation.
We welcome any questions or concerns you have about scoring.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Session #1 report
On time: 0/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student specifics: 4/6
Total: 10/15
Comments: Nice job in documenting the contents taught in the class and how the session flowed! For specific student reactions, however, we are looking for what they said/answered/asked in class in regards to the contents instead of their actions, but overall great report!
LY 11/16
Session #2 report
On time: 0/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student specifics: 6/6
Total: 12/15
Comments: Great job explaining the rationales behind your team activities, such as your intro videos and transcripts, and excellent outlook in future sessions!
LY 11/16
Session #3 report
On time: 0/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student specifics: 6/6
Total: 12/15
Comments: I really like how you associate students’ specific responses to the skillset they demonstrated in class, which is the essential purpose of teaching. Great job!
LY 11/16/23
Session #4 report
On time: 0/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student specifics: 6/6
Total: 12/15
Comments: I’m glad you enjoyed your TIRP experience and learned from this opportunity! Always welcome back to TIRP for the upcoming semesters!
LY 11/16/23
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2023
11-15-2023, 03:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-15-2023, 04:13 PM by Hayley Minnae Simpson.)
Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 1 Causes of War
October 4, 2023
Session 1 Materials: Name that Tune! Distinguish Levels of Analysis in US Foreign Policy Making + Prisoner’s Dilemma PPT.
Focus Question: How do you apply the three levels of analysis to observe countries’ foreign policy? What is the prisoner’s dilemma and its connection to IR?
For the first session our team decided to use the “Name that Tune!” activity to get the students familiar with the different levels of analysis. Before starting the activity, we presented a powerpoint going over the basic factors of each level of analysis. We asked students if any words were familiar to them and then we went over the terms. This is important as the vocabulary makes up the text practices and provides insight into each level of analysis. After going over the terms, we begin the prisoner’s dilemma activity. This was an activity I created myself in order to explain the concept of cooperation in a real life situation. Each student was put in pairs and had an index card. Then, they decided if they would snitch on their partner or stay silent on their index card. Afterwards, they revealed their answers to their partner. I explained how this refers to the concepts of the prisoner’s dilemma as it relates to cooperation and lack of iteration. When asked “how would the scenario have resulted in a better way for all parties involved?” Student A detailed how discussing their responses beforehand and knowing the other person’s decision would have altered theirs; thus, it connected to the points of iteration and reciprocal punishment. Then we moved onto the “Name that Tune!” activity. This activity related to the levels of analysis, the Iraq War, and the factors of war. We split the students into groups of 3. We emphasized how the basic factors would be essential in understanding the levels of analysis. Students began to make connections between the text paragraphs and the LOA chart. I walked around the class, asking if anyone had any questions, and Student B asked me to check their group’s work. I was happy to see that they had all of the answers correct, they said that the powerpoint helped them understand the vocabulary. When we went over the answer as a class the biggest issue was that people were mixing up national and international answers. So, we just explained the different concepts and ways to differentiate between them. Students were able to make connections between seeing adjectives surrounding a leader and knowing that this is the individual level of analysis. Student C said that they knew right away that it was individual based on the wording and if they focused on the leader or not. Mr. John’s comment asked us to not choose the same students for each question, so we will make sure you switch this up for next time. Even though students don’t raise their hands, it’s important to cold call to make sure each student knows the information and you get them out of their comfort zone a bit. If I were to do this again and I had more time, I would add slides to the presentation about the failures of bargaining and how this relates to cooperation. In my Intro to IR class, we are learning about the rationalist ideas surrounding the cause of war - I think this should be included in TIRP lessons as well.
Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson Period 2 - Session 2 Causes of War
October 11, 2023
Session 1 Materials: Vox: Putin’s War on Ukraine, Explained
Focus Question: How can the levels of analysis be applied in the scope of the outbreak of war between Russia and Ukraine?
To start, we incorporated multimedia elements by showing a video that provided insights into the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Distributing the transcript allowed students to closely follow the content, essentially creating a roadmap for them to identify and highlight key concepts related to the basic factors and the levels of analysis we had discussed earlier. This dual approach aimed to cater to different learning styles, reinforcing the auditory and visual aspects of understanding. Reiterating the vocabulary from our previous session served two purposes. Firstly, it was a strategic move to solidify their grasp on essential terms. Secondly, it provided a bridge to connect theoretical knowledge with practical application. It was heartening to observe Student A seamlessly connecting the dots, linking the concept of sovereignty to the basic factors vocabulary in the international context and, in turn, to the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war. This not only showcased retention but, more importantly, an ability to apply theoretical knowledge to complex real-world scenarios. The collaborative aspect of the session came into play as we encouraged students to engage in reflective discussions with their table partners. This not only promoted teamwork but also provided an opportunity for students to articulate their thoughts and viewpoints. To facilitate this process, we introduced a basic factors chart. The aim was to guide students in organizing their ideas within a structured analytical framework. Students B and C stood out during this activity, effectively using the chart to communicate their ideas. This not only demonstrated their understanding of the material but also their ability to express complex thoughts within a coherent framework. The practical application of theoretical knowledge through activities like these is crucial in ensuring a deeper and more meaningful understanding of the subject matter. Following the video and reflective discussions, we directed our attention to a class-wide discussion. We prompted each student to share their reflections on the follow-up questions. Question 3, deliberately left open-ended, served as a focal point. This approach aimed to stimulate critical thinking and encourage students to evaluate the conflict from multiple perspectives. It was interesting to note the diversity of responses. Students considered different levels of analysis to be the most pertinent, and this diversity sparked a lively discussion. What was particularly encouraging was the emphasis on providing textual evidence to support their points of view. This not only showcased their analytical skills but also promoted a more rigorous and evidence-based approach to understanding conflicts. The subsequent class-wide discussion and review of answers served as a valuable exercise in consolidating individual perspectives. By focusing on the more open-ended question 3, students were prompted to critically evaluate and articulate their views on the most pertinent level of analysis for studying the war. The diversity of responses highlighted the richness of different viewpoints, and the practice of substantiating opinions with textual evidence added depth to the discourse. This exercise not only encouraged critical thinking but also cultivated an appreciation for varied perspectives among students. By acknowledging and respecting the diversity of opinions, the session contributed to a holistic understanding of the complexity involved in analyzing conflicts. Moving forward, it would be valuable to continue exploring real-world applications of theoretical concepts, fostering a deeper engagement with the subject matter and refining the students' analytical prowess.
Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 3 Causes of War
October 18, 2023
Session 3 Materials: WW1 Text Analysis + Response Questions
Focus Question: How can the levels of analysis be applied in the scope of World War 1?
In our third session, we strategically aimed to elevate engagement levels by implementing an active and participatory approach. The decision to cold call students right from the beginning set a tone of active involvement and ensured everyone was ready to contribute. We opted for a text analysis focused on World War 1, a historically significant conflict with multiple layers of analysis spanning different levels. Recognizing that this war is a topic they are likely to encounter in the future, we sought to deepen their understanding and analytical skills. To overcome potential hesitation in speaking up, we introduced a popcorn reading method. This not only encouraged students to actively participate in the reading process but also served as a means to alleviate any fears associated with speaking in class. Each section of the text was strategically designed, with a basic factor highlighted in bold after every paragraph. This structure facilitated a step-by-step breakdown of the text, prompting students to articulate how each section referenced the highlighted term. Student A showcased a commendable understanding of the material by delving into the concept of nationalism. They effectively elucidated how this factor can significantly impact public opinion and influence the beliefs of a leader. This not only demonstrated a grasp of the theoretical concept but also showcased the ability to apply it to a historical context. It's encouraging to see students making connections between abstract ideas and real-world events. An identified challenge during the session was the slower reading pace of some students, which led to an adjustment in our approach. To ensure we covered the material comprehensively, I alternated reading with the students. This modification not only addressed the pace issue but also provided a dynamic reading experience. Additionally, rather than waiting until the end of the session to go over the questions, we chose to review and discuss them after a few paragraphs. This proactive approach allowed students to complete and turn in their answers by the end of the session, maximizing the use of our time together. Student B demonstrated a keen ability to synthesize information promptly by connecting the text to the concept of imperialism. Their swift response showcased not only comprehension but also an adept analytical skill set. This immediate connection between the text and a key theoretical concept is a positive indicator of their growing analytical prowess. The interactive reading aloud method seemed to have a positive impact on comprehension and engagement, as evidenced by Student C's contribution. Not only did they add valuable insights to the discussion, but they also managed to link the current session back to Session 2, referencing Russia's imperialistic nature. This ability to draw connections across sessions indicates a developing holistic understanding of the subject matter. While the reading pace presented a challenge, the session showcased adaptability in our teaching approach and students' active participation. The integration of theoretical concepts into a historical context, coupled with the strategic reading methods, seems to be contributing positively to both engagement and comprehension. Moving forward, it would be beneficial to continue refining our strategies to address varied reading speeds and to explore more opportunities for students to apply theoretical knowledge to different historical events, ensuring a well-rounded and practical understanding of conflict analysis.
Hayley Simpson TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 4 Causes of War
November 1, 2023
Session 4 Materials: Three US 19th Century Wars Case Comparisons
Focus Question: Are there factors of war common across different wars? How do they compare? Do they contribute to war today?
In our last class, we wrapped things up with a comparison of three wars: the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American War, and the War of 1812. To make it more manageable, we put students into groups of three, each focusing on one war. The idea was to give them enough time to really dig into the details. As I walked around the room, I noticed something important—we should have checked if everyone remembered the basics at the beginning. It had been two weeks since our last session (thanks to the PSAT getting in the way), and students have other classes, so their memory might not have been fresh on the levels of analysis and causes of war. To make up for it, we provided extra help to each group and went over the key concepts again. After the group work, we took a step toward a collaborative presentation. Each group chose a representative to share their findings with the class. This was a big deal, especially because in the first session, students were shy about even raising their hands. Student A, B, and C, who talked about the Mexican-American War, did a great job working together. The class got involved by asking questions and talking about whether an answer fit better on the national or individual level. It was a cool moment seeing everyone participating and discussing the topics. To finish things off, we did a Quizziz. The average score wasn't as high as I hoped, but what mattered most was that the students tried to understand a new concept, and they paid attention. It was a good effort. This whole teaching thing taught me that it's a lot of work! Planning lessons, coordinating with others, and trying to keep students interested—it's a juggling act. This relates to my time at USC as I know I’m going to have to multitask and be able to focus on various different project and assignments at once. I hope to do more volunteer opportunities in the future as helping people is a great passion of mine. I’m studying International Relations - Global Business, I hope I can use my education and major to help people with their finances and such; as well as donate to nonprofit organizations. In the end, it was rewarding. I'm happy I got to share some knowledge with the students around our campus. Looking back, it's clear that teaching is about being ready for anything and finding ways to make learning fun and engaging. The challenges, like unexpected schedule changes and making sure everyone is on the same page, taught me a lot. Even though it wasn't always easy, seeing the students grow and participate made it all worth it. As I think about the future, I'll keep these lessons in mind. Regularly checking in on what students know, being flexible with plans, and making learning a team effort—all of these will play a big part in creating a positive learning experience. Teaching isn't just about giving information; it's about adapting and making sure everyone is along for the ride.
(11-15-2023, 03:48 PM)Hayley Minnae Simpson Wrote: Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 1 Causes of War
October 4, 2023
Session 1 Materials: Name that Tune! Distinguish Levels of Analysis in US Foreign Policy Making + Prisoner’s Dilemma PPT.
Focus Question: How do you apply the three levels of analysis to observe countries’ foreign policy? What is the prisoner’s dilemma and its connection to IR?
For the first session our team decided to use the “Name that Tune!” activity to get the students familiar with the different levels of analysis. Before starting the activity, we presented a powerpoint going over the basic factors of each level of analysis. We asked students if any words were familiar to them and then we went over the terms. This is important as the vocabulary makes up the text practices and provides insight into each level of analysis. After going over the terms, we begin the prisoner’s dilemma activity. This was an activity I created myself in order to explain the concept of cooperation in a real life situation. Each student was put in pairs and had an index card. Then, they decided if they would snitch on their partner or stay silent on their index card. Afterwards, they revealed their answers to their partner. I explained how this refers to the concepts of the prisoner’s dilemma as it relates to cooperation and lack of iteration. When asked “how would the scenario have resulted in a better way for all parties involved?” Student A detailed how discussing their responses beforehand and knowing the other person’s decision would have altered theirs; thus, it connected to the points of iteration and reciprocal punishment. Then we moved onto the “Name that Tune!” activity. This activity related to the levels of analysis, the Iraq War, and the factors of war. We split the students into groups of 3. We emphasized how the basic factors would be essential in understanding the levels of analysis. Students began to make connections between the text paragraphs and the LOA chart. I walked around the class, asking if anyone had any questions, and Student B asked me to check their group’s work. I was happy to see that they had all of the answers correct, they said that the powerpoint helped them understand the vocabulary. When we went over the answer as a class the biggest issue was that people were mixing up national and international answers. So, we just explained the different concepts and ways to differentiate between them. Students were able to make connections between seeing adjectives surrounding a leader and knowing that this is the individual level of analysis. Student C said that they knew right away that it was individual based on the wording and if they focused on the leader or not. Mr. John’s comment asked us to not choose the same students for each question, so we will make sure you switch this up for next time. Even though students don’t raise their hands, it’s important to cold call to make sure each student knows the information and you get them out of their comfort zone a bit. If I were to do this again and I had more time, I would add slides to the presentation about the failures of bargaining and how this relates to cooperation. In my Intro to IR class, we are learning about the rationalist ideas surrounding the cause of war - I think this should be included in TIRP lessons as well.
Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson Period 2 - Session 2 Causes of War
October 11, 2023
Session 1 Materials: Vox: Putin’s War on Ukraine, Explained
Focus Question: How can the levels of analysis be applied in the scope of the outbreak of war between Russia and Ukraine?
To start, we incorporated multimedia elements by showing a video that provided insights into the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Distributing the transcript allowed students to closely follow the content, essentially creating a roadmap for them to identify and highlight key concepts related to the basic factors and the levels of analysis we had discussed earlier. This dual approach aimed to cater to different learning styles, reinforcing the auditory and visual aspects of understanding. Reiterating the vocabulary from our previous session served two purposes. Firstly, it was a strategic move to solidify their grasp on essential terms. Secondly, it provided a bridge to connect theoretical knowledge with practical application. It was heartening to observe Student A seamlessly connecting the dots, linking the concept of sovereignty to the basic factors vocabulary in the international context and, in turn, to the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war. This not only showcased retention but, more importantly, an ability to apply theoretical knowledge to complex real-world scenarios. The collaborative aspect of the session came into play as we encouraged students to engage in reflective discussions with their table partners. This not only promoted teamwork but also provided an opportunity for students to articulate their thoughts and viewpoints. To facilitate this process, we introduced a basic factors chart. The aim was to guide students in organizing their ideas within a structured analytical framework. Students B and C stood out during this activity, effectively using the chart to communicate their ideas. This not only demonstrated their understanding of the material but also their ability to express complex thoughts within a coherent framework. The practical application of theoretical knowledge through activities like these is crucial in ensuring a deeper and more meaningful understanding of the subject matter. Following the video and reflective discussions, we directed our attention to a class-wide discussion. We prompted each student to share their reflections on the follow-up questions. Question 3, deliberately left open-ended, served as a focal point. This approach aimed to stimulate critical thinking and encourage students to evaluate the conflict from multiple perspectives. It was interesting to note the diversity of responses. Students considered different levels of analysis to be the most pertinent, and this diversity sparked a lively discussion. What was particularly encouraging was the emphasis on providing textual evidence to support their points of view. This not only showcased their analytical skills but also promoted a more rigorous and evidence-based approach to understanding conflicts. The subsequent class-wide discussion and review of answers served as a valuable exercise in consolidating individual perspectives. By focusing on the more open-ended question 3, students were prompted to critically evaluate and articulate their views on the most pertinent level of analysis for studying the war. The diversity of responses highlighted the richness of different viewpoints, and the practice of substantiating opinions with textual evidence added depth to the discourse. This exercise not only encouraged critical thinking but also cultivated an appreciation for varied perspectives among students. By acknowledging and respecting the diversity of opinions, the session contributed to a holistic understanding of the complexity involved in analyzing conflicts. Moving forward, it would be valuable to continue exploring real-world applications of theoretical concepts, fostering a deeper engagement with the subject matter and refining the students' analytical prowess.
Hayley Simpson
TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 3 Causes of War
October 18, 2023
Session 3 Materials: WW1 Text Analysis + Response Questions
Focus Question: How can the levels of analysis be applied in the scope of World War 1?
In our third session, we strategically aimed to elevate engagement levels by implementing an active and participatory approach. The decision to cold call students right from the beginning set a tone of active involvement and ensured everyone was ready to contribute. We opted for a text analysis focused on World War 1, a historically significant conflict with multiple layers of analysis spanning different levels. Recognizing that this war is a topic they are likely to encounter in the future, we sought to deepen their understanding and analytical skills. To overcome potential hesitation in speaking up, we introduced a popcorn reading method. This not only encouraged students to actively participate in the reading process but also served as a means to alleviate any fears associated with speaking in class. Each section of the text was strategically designed, with a basic factor highlighted in bold after every paragraph. This structure facilitated a step-by-step breakdown of the text, prompting students to articulate how each section referenced the highlighted term. Student A showcased a commendable understanding of the material by delving into the concept of nationalism. They effectively elucidated how this factor can significantly impact public opinion and influence the beliefs of a leader. This not only demonstrated a grasp of the theoretical concept but also showcased the ability to apply it to a historical context. It's encouraging to see students making connections between abstract ideas and real-world events. An identified challenge during the session was the slower reading pace of some students, which led to an adjustment in our approach. To ensure we covered the material comprehensively, I alternated reading with the students. This modification not only addressed the pace issue but also provided a dynamic reading experience. Additionally, rather than waiting until the end of the session to go over the questions, we chose to review and discuss them after a few paragraphs. This proactive approach allowed students to complete and turn in their answers by the end of the session, maximizing the use of our time together. Student B demonstrated a keen ability to synthesize information promptly by connecting the text to the concept of imperialism. Their swift response showcased not only comprehension but also an adept analytical skill set. This immediate connection between the text and a key theoretical concept is a positive indicator of their growing analytical prowess. The interactive reading aloud method seemed to have a positive impact on comprehension and engagement, as evidenced by Student C's contribution. Not only did they add valuable insights to the discussion, but they also managed to link the current session back to Session 2, referencing Russia's imperialistic nature. This ability to draw connections across sessions indicates a developing holistic understanding of the subject matter. While the reading pace presented a challenge, the session showcased adaptability in our teaching approach and students' active participation. The integration of theoretical concepts into a historical context, coupled with the strategic reading methods, seems to be contributing positively to both engagement and comprehension. Moving forward, it would be beneficial to continue refining our strategies to address varied reading speeds and to explore more opportunities for students to apply theoretical knowledge to different historical events, ensuring a well-rounded and practical understanding of conflict analysis.
Hayley Simpson TIRP - John Johnson
Period 2 - Session 4 Causes of War
November 1, 2023
Session 4 Materials: Three US 19th Century Wars Case Comparisons
Focus Question: Are there factors of war common across different wars? How do they compare? Do they contribute to war today?
In our last class, we wrapped things up with a comparison of three wars: the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American War, and the War of 1812. To make it more manageable, we put students into groups of three, each focusing on one war. The idea was to give them enough time to really dig into the details. As I walked around the room, I noticed something important—we should have checked if everyone remembered the basics at the beginning. It had been two weeks since our last session (thanks to the PSAT getting in the way), and students have other classes, so their memory might not have been fresh on the levels of analysis and causes of war. To make up for it, we provided extra help to each group and went over the key concepts again. After the group work, we took a step toward a collaborative presentation. Each group chose a representative to share their findings with the class. This was a big deal, especially because in the first session, students were shy about even raising their hands. Student A, B, and C, who talked about the Mexican-American War, did a great job working together. The class got involved by asking questions and talking about whether an answer fit better on the national or individual level. It was a cool moment seeing everyone participating and discussing the topics. To finish things off, we did a Quizziz. The average score wasn't as high as I hoped, but what mattered most was that the students tried to understand a new concept, and they paid attention. It was a good effort. This whole teaching thing taught me that it's a lot of work! Planning lessons, coordinating with others, and trying to keep students interested—it's a juggling act. This relates to my time at USC as I know I’m going to have to multitask and be able to focus on various different project and assignments at once. I hope to do more volunteer opportunities in the future as helping people is a great passion of mine. I’m studying International Relations - Global Business, I hope I can use my education and major to help people with their finances and such; as well as donate to nonprofit organizations. In the end, it was rewarding. I'm happy I got to share some knowledge with the students around our campus. Looking back, it's clear that teaching is about being ready for anything and finding ways to make learning fun and engaging. The challenges, like unexpected schedule changes and making sure everyone is on the same page, taught me a lot. Even though it wasn't always easy, seeing the students grow and participate made it all worth it. As I think about the future, I'll keep these lessons in mind. Regularly checking in on what students know, being flexible with plans, and making learning a team effort—all of these will play a big part in creating a positive learning experience. Teaching isn't just about giving information; it's about adapting and making sure everyone is along for the ride.
|
