Micro-Teaching Session – Revisited

What went well and what didn’t go well?

I ended up changing quite a bit of my lesson based on the feedback I got and the personal reflecting I did afterwards. I think I made a good choice to really focus on one small element of the content and to provide more space for the learners to self-reflect. That in turn felt more aligned with Indigenous pedagogy, because the learners were able to draw upon their own knowledge sources to contribute to the lesson. I got feedback that my choice not to use slides ended up being effective in creating some human connection and reflection over zoom, rather than just a one-way channel of information exchange.

I was unsure how it would feel for the learners to move between zoom and the Jamboard that I used. I tried to direct the learners to specific parts of the Jamboard when necessary, and my feedback told me that that was quite useful. While this was nice to hear, I realized that my commitment to not using slides does not necessary mean that I achieve the outcome I desired. I tried to created a less hierarchical learning environment or a more relational space without slides – but it only felt like that happened the second time (I got much better feedback the second time I implemented the same strategies, which tells me that being an effective educator really is a unique blend of so many characteristics and strategies). By not using slides, it meant that students were leaving the zoom space to look at and access the Jamboard. This strategy could have easily perpetuated the same dynamics that I was trying to avoid and that I felt were not aligned with Indigenous pedagogy as I currently know it. Therefore, I acknowledge that a challenge of trying to learn about, foster, and implement Indigenous pedagogical strategies is that it can actually be much more personal than other pedagogical philosophies or strategies. It was my own humanity, it seems, that sparked some reflection and connection for the learners. This makes me wonder about how else I can try to foster connection, relationships, and belonging in my learning spaces.

With this knowledge, I must also acknowledge that this is an on-going learning journey that I am on. How I have chosen to initially attempt to implement these strategies may be wildly different in 3 years. In the future, I plan continue to create and consult my list of pedagogical strategies that I’ve been making as part of my goals – not to hoard knowledge, but so that I can draw upon a bank of a variety of strategies depending on what the learning outcome is for a particular lesson. Since seeing my talk without slides was helpful for sparking reflection, how might I chose to introduce a different topic with a different outcome? And how might that topic and/or strategy align or contrast with what I’ve learned about Indigenous pedagogy?

What have you learned about your teaching or you as an instructor through this process that is different from your first delivery?

What a gift it is to have space to try something twice, after receiving feedback. It was so valuable to be able to hear my peers’ feedback and to make adjustments to meet their needs. Without their feedback I would have had to guess what worked and what didn’t. The most valuable realization I’ve had about myself, is that I want to have “space” in my teaching style for learners to reflect, engage, and “linger in generative space”. It doesn’t feel right for me to always be talking, telling, and convincing. Sometimes I want learners to convince each other. Sometimes I want someone to think differently after a provocation or invitation. I want learners to be able to have space to wonder, ponder in reverence, and to have affective experiences, not just cognitive ones. These insights are not necessarily new to me, because I have been trained to think this was as an ECE, but finding ways to translate that into higher education is what I have learned in this course.

Unfortunately, it seems that there aren’t many organic opportunities for feedback to occur within my grad school training. But since I’ve recognized the value of seeing if my intentions translated to impact, what I can do is to intentionally create or engage in those feedback opportunities. In the future, this means continuing to seek feedback on my teaching, through having an observer, through presenting to peers, through using feedback tools like Qualtrics surveys, and through ongoing professional development in the area of SoTL (not just my content areas).

What did you change or improve upon based on the feedback you received from your first delivery?

After much thought, I decided not to include the feedback related to rethinking my lack of slides. But what I did instead is add information to the Jamboard so that learners could follow along visually if they wanted that. I was really concerned with wanting the learners to have visual access to the information after I got feedback about my lesson not feeling structured, and wanted to find a way to resolve my competing interests in way that still felt aligned with the Indigenous pedagogical strategies I was using. This felt like a good way to compromise and include some of both methods (and it was brought to my attention that in person this would be different because I could just give a hand-out). I chose to copy and paste some key information into the chat on Zoom, such as the learning outcomes and the quotation I used as my bridge in.

I noticed that last time I didn’t feel like there was enough thinking and reflective space for the learners so I took out 2 sections of my content, and instead focused on the what epistemology is, rather than different epistemological orientations. I was quite rushed last time and didn’t feel like I left learners with a clear message or idea. Whereas this time, the simplicity brought with it a focus that all learners could engage with.

I chose to take out my pre and post assessment for the sake of time and simplicity, and opted to use the Zoom reaction feature for some feedback about student’s knowledge. I got some helpful feedback that doing that in a large class might be problematic due to anonymity, number of reactions, and not being able to compare the results. I really appreciated this, and it got me thinking about the value of engaging with the same group of learners and peers so that in our space answering my question in a non-anonymous way didn’t feel intimidating. What I mean by this is I wonder if having small break out rooms with the same people each week could allow learners to create a small community of practice for themselves, and a safe space to be themselves, grapple with content, and learn authentically. It’s funny how feedback about a Zoom reaction ended up making me reflect on the larger learning environment and sense of belonging.

For my future work, I am really pondering how and where I can find “space” in my lessons to allow for active self-reflection, engagement, and the creation of some sense of community. I really have valued that classes I have been a part of that offer a space that I feel I can contribute to and that moves at a pace that lets me grapple with things that are just beyond my current knowledge. I’m quite happy with how my second less went, and I would love if I could re-create that effect in other spaces that I enter as an educator. I have started to think about what I would need in order to recreate the success I felt, and part of it includes knowledge of my learners (which I may or may not have). As Dale said, sometimes we make pedagogical and universal design decisions based on the learners once we have a relationship with them. I’m thinking about where and when I can create that rapport and culture. But I’m also thinking about how I will have to seek feedback from my students within a single lesson, unit, or semester, in order to make these appropriate adjustments. Since it’s unlikely that I give the same lesson twice to a group of learners, I am trying to think about how else I can receive feedback for times when I give a second lesson on different content or with a new group of learners.

What would you have done differently if you had another chance to deliver it again

I would make my active learning task even more simple. I so badly wanted to push learners to think beyond the traditional academic frameworks of knowledge, but I’ve realized that I may have to let some of that go (or make it more explicit as part of my learning outcomes). Because with this being part of the hidden curriculum, it made that last activity is bit muddy. As part of my future practice, I want to be fairly clear on what I want learners to learn and why, and I don’t want there to be additional information or a hidden agenda. I might have to continue to reflect upon my own values and how I can suspend them in order in places where appropriate. I don’t really believe I can be a fully objective educator, but I believe I can work form a pragmatic place such that I can support learners in their own journeys rather than convince them to follow mine. In that regard, this is a challenge that I am still grappling with, especially on a topic like Indigenous pedagogy because it is a topic that can be “mastered” by a white person, not something learned in a set amount of time, and there definitely is not a mapped out curriculum in order to become competent in this area. It is a messy and ongoing journey of un-learning and re-learning, and a journey that perhaps is not for everyone.

Addtionally, I wish I had asked for feedback about what it meant for me as a white cis-woman to be delivering a lesson using Indigenous pedagogy. I would like to know if it felt extractive. That felt like an icky thing for me to be doing and something I need to continue to reflect upon and seek support on in my future as a culturally-responsive, relationship-based educator.

Syllabus and Lesson Plan Reflections

Reflection 2: Evaluating a Syllabus

What I learned from the evaluation of the syllabus

The syllabus evaluation exercise prompted me to think about communicating expectations and to students. I chose this course outline because I know that it includes scaffolding assignments and trains students on designing program plans for young children. The course is called Program Design for Children and is a second year course with in the Child Studies program here at Guelph, in FRHD. There is a lot of cross over with this content and lesson planning for adults. But the interesting thing that I noticed is that these scaffolded assignments which include summative feedback are not well described to students who read the syllabus. A student likely just sees the 3 assignments with different grades attached, but there isn’t a clear description that these assignments all build on each other (in reality I know they do, since I’ve taken the course and TA the course and spoken at length with the department about this). Further, only one assignment is thoroughly explained, and no grading breakdown was provided within this document. A light-bulb moment for me and inference I made from this is that by these standards, a course outline must stand on its own without needing to make these connections for students through verbal instructions. I wonder whether University instructors are aware that this is best practice in SoTL. Syllabi are often explained in the first week of class with a break down of major assignments, so I wonder how many instructors rely on this clarification process to discuss the nuances of the syllabus with the learners.

Additionally, while I really liked the learning outcomes, realizing that they did not cover the full range of Fink’s dimensions was interesting. I initially thought that this was an oversight for the course, and that the instructor should consider adding some higher-level skills from the list. Since I know the placement of this course within the larger program curricula, I was able to realize, though, that this might actually not be what the course needs. This course is the first of three courses that scaffold students learning wile they get trained as educators. There are good reasons that some of the higher-level skills are not included here, because students are learning the basic applied skills for observing behaviour, analyzing behaviour from a developmental perspective, and beginning to understand how they might scaffold children’s development using their interests and current abilities. Upon even further reflection, however, I realized that this course also does include some of those higher-level skills such as application (by applying developmental knowledge so that a program plan is developmentally appropriate), and integration (by connecting observations to developmental theory and next-steps in the program plans as an educator), and additional skills such as: collaborating to create a group project, responding to children’s developmental needs, identifying developmental skills from observations, and creating a plan (the students literally create 3 versions of a program plan). These skills are demonstrated by students in a very applied way that we do not typically consider within academia, but they are skills present in these assignments (which I only know from taking and TA’ing the course). After looking back on the learning objectives for this reflection, I see that they do in fact include some of these examples I mentioned, so perhaps I didn’t realize at the time that these covered more of Fink’s dimensions than I originally documented. Regardless I believe the learning outcomes could be adjusted slightly to reflect how students are in fact engaging in the continuum of Fink’s dimensions, even if in different ways that was is typical for academic undergraduate training.

Challenges: One main challenge for choosing a syllabus that I have familiarity with is that I could have been a bit biased in my analysis, such that I was rating it harsher than one of my peers might. In the future it would be interesting for me to do this again with a syllabus that I am not familiar with, to see if I would have interpreted it differently.

Future Implications: I have seen Blooms taxonomy used when developing programs with young children so I know that it is possible to take Fink’s dimensions and align then with the a course’s goals for students. I think that we need to learn about Fink’s dimensions in a way that allows us as future instructors to be flexible with how we apply these verbs in order to fit the expectations of the course. Additionally, I liked learning that sometimes courses intentionally don’t include all dimensions if they are part of a larger scaffolded experience for students. I am wondering if there is away to clearly communicate that to students within the syllabi so that students understand the connections that the learning outcomes have for their future and past courses within a particular program.

Focus of the syllabus

The syllabus is mostly content-focused, and I was “let down” by this because of the irony of a course for educators not including learning-focused elements. Although the learning outcomes provide clear descriptions of some of the learning, there is not a description about what students will learn each week or through each assignment or assessment. Like we discussed in class, having a learning-focused syllabi coveys a warm and welcoming tone, non-hierarchical, student-centred approach to the structure of the class. I feel like it is a hugely missed opportunity to not include at least a few sentences about what students will have the opportunity to learn about each week. This could easily be modified by adding in sentences to the schedule under the content covered each week. Additionally, including more about what learning the students are engaging in within the descriptions in each of the assessments would be an easy way to add in additional information.

Challenge: As noted from the article we read about learning-focused syllabi, there was not a resounding appreciation for the learning-focused syllabi from the individuals in the study. One of the things participants talked about was the syllabus being confusing and long. I also worry about this when learning-centred syllabi. From an accessibility stand point, a long and wordy document may be less helpful in ensuring students can have success in the course, even if it does create a welcoming tone to the document. I hope in the future that I can consider including elements of learning and a warm tone without making the document inaccessible to my students.

Reflection 3: Reflecting on my design of, and feedback from, my lesson plan

Difficult parts of creating a lesson plan

I had a lot of difficulty understanding what we could make the lesson plan about. I ended up not being able to get a lot of feedback on my lesson plan because my partner and I were figuring out what to teach about versus what strategies we could use during the feedback session. I found the most challenging part filling in all the components of the BOPPS model into a 10 minute activity. This was an excellent learning opportunity for me because I tend to plan really long guest lectures so I have a lot to learn in predicting how long each part of the lesson plan will take.

Since I am running a “work shop” on emergent curriculum as a TA in a few weeks, I initially wanted to plan my lesson around this topic as some practice ahead of time. But once I realized I had to use an Indigenous pedagogical strategy, this topic no longer felt aligned with the strategy that I wanted to demonstrate or practice. I brought this up during my feedback session with my peer and they agreed. In response to this realization, I changed my topic to be about epistemology, or Ways of Knowing, since this can clearly be taught using Indigenous pedagogical strategies, at least as I know them to be. Again, fitting this topic and my strategy into 10 minutes was a challenge! But I just did my best to remember that the point of this is for me to practice this skill.

Most difficult part about receiving feedback

My peer gave me honest and helpful feedback. I am fortunate in that my undergrad training really opened me up to receiving feedback with grace, and I welcomed her insight. The main challenge was that she wasn’t as knowledgable about Indigenous pedagogy as I had hoped, so it might have been helpful to discuss it with my group member who is doing the same topic as I am. I tried to explain what I could, but Indigenous pedagogy can go against the things that have allowed us to be successful in academia (as grad students) so it’s not something that can just be explained simply in a 20 minute period. To understand the topic it needs to be revisited again and again, like many things in Indigenous culture, as I currently understand it. So, this was part of the feedback process that felt clunky for me, and not particularly helpful on this strategy.

Admittedly, it was hard to hear that my lesson plan wasn’t as clear as I thought it would be since I have some experience writing lesson plans. I helped me realized that there is still so much for me to learn about creating program plans, and I will never be fully competent in understanding every learner’s perspective. In this way, continuing to learn and get feedback on my lesson plans and teaching strategies is essential for my ongoing professional development. Even when feeling saturating in knowledge in the area of how learning happens, there will always be more for me to learn, and additional perspectives to consider.

Effective Feedback as an Educator

I don’t like thinking of myself as a teacher or having a teaching practice per se. I don’t “teach” as my main responsibility, even as an early childhood educator. I co-learn. I walk with children and students as they learn. My practice is to be a responsive and caring adult (not an expert). I am trained to respond to the needs and curiosities of my learners, by observing and analyzing their skills and interests and extending these abilities through meaningful and engaging activities. In this regard, reflective practice is essential to being a responsive educator who can grow with students. By extension, receiving feedback is a crucial piece of expanding our self-awareness, understanding our impacts on learners, and continuing to adjust our practice over time. There will never be a time where an educator can stop learning about being an effective educator, especially because every group of students is unique. And feedback from others is necessary because we aren’t usually able to fully see past our own biases or to interpret our ideas from the students perspective. I hope I am able to continue to engage in professional development that allows me to have direct feedback on my skills in action (not just learning about concepts without applying them and seeing how it works out).

Additionally, I have realized that practicing something without getting feedback is not always sufficient to ensure that the necessary growth can take place. Practicing without feedback would be like practicing playing music without ever listening to yourself on a recording or getting people to tell you their reactions. It’s a different experience to get direct feedback on your ideas or performance than the act of practicing those ideas or performance. I think that there really isn’t a replacement for getting feedback from others on our pedagogical decisions.

Feedback I am Using

My peer mentioned keeping my active learning activity very simple because I had a lot packed in. I realized that I agreed, and that it might be too much to complete in 10 mins. I realized that I could use this feedback AND implement an additional strategy from the articles I read on Indigenous pedagogy. I could allow students to self-pace their completion of this activity beyond the scope of the lesson plan, which is reflective of how students self-paced their completion of courses in the study I read for my SoTL snapshot (Papp, 2020). I decided to use this feedback in a unique way, and I would not have had this realization without a peer mentioning it in a way that prompted me to think differently about it.

My peer also liked that I included a jamboard and menti link, so I am going to keep both.

Feedback I am not using

My peer mentioned that my topic choice of epistemology was a big topic to discuss in 10 minutes. We chatted a bit about it and I agreed. I probably should change the topic. However, I decided that I wanted to try it anyway because a different topic was not coming to mind that would allow me to utilize an Indigenous pedagogical strategy. From my reading, it is not enough to simple inject Indigenous content into courses in order to decolonize academia, so I felt strongly about avoiding doing that. Instead, I wanted to teach about an academic topic by using documented Indigenous pedagogical strategies like I had learned about. I felt that this was a great extension on the learning I have been doing about Indigenizing the curriculum over the past year or so, and would be a good challenge for myself. I have other opportunities to teach simpler topics so this felt like a risk that I wanted to try for my own learning and growth. We will see how it works out.

Future implications

For the scope of this course, it proved challenging to finish my lesson plan on the topic of epistemology and I had to significantly cut down the content in order to included all the strategies and BOPPS items that I wanted to. I am wondering what is more important for my learning: to demonstrate I can implement BOPPPS in a 10 min lesson plan or to try to decolonize my own pedagogical practice at a deeper level. I can’t seem to do both and meet the expectations of this assignment. I am craving more practicing with implementing Indigenous pedagogy and I am trying to find a way that I can continue to learn about this topic outside of this course.

University Teaching: Theory and Practice – Reflection

The next few blog posts may be a bit different from my past posts about the ECEC sector. I am currently enrolled in an MSc program at the University of Guelph and I am taking a course called University Teaching: Theory and Practice. As both an academic and an educator, I will be documenting some of my learning and development here.

What I Wish to Accomplish This Course

As a Registered Early Childhood Educator (RECE), I have been reimagining my image of “learners”, how learning happens, what inclusive learning environments look/feel/sound like, how best to document learning, and my role as a co-learner/”educator” for the past few years. The ways in which I think about learners has stretched (shattered, even,) my ideas and definitions of what successful learners look like. I already know that my aim as a current and future educator is to be relationship-based, responsive, and student-centered while I foster engaging and inclusive learning environments. In early learning settings I have gained confidence in facilitating active learning activities, but due to the play-based emergent curriculum in early childhood education and care, there will be some differences between my skillset for learning with young children and learning with adults. So, what does active learning look like at the University level and how can I facilitate it? My first idea for what I hope to accomplish in this course is to be able to translate what I have learned about early learning pedagogy into adult learning strategies. Thus, my first SMART goal is:

By the end of this semester, I will be able to facilitate a 20-minute interaction lesson with students through zoom. To achieve this, I will implement activities in my micro-teaching session, including menti, jamboard or kahoot, which ask the learners to contribute collaboratively to answering questions or reflect upon the information that is being discussed. If I can implement these tools, receive student engagement through their use of these tools, and if I am able to respond to my peers’ answers, I will feel I have achieved this goal.

Additionally, through previous reflections I have identified that I would like my teaching approaches to be rooted in decolonization and equity. This stems from reflecting on “all my relations,” including that with land, and how this intersects with being an educator. Indigenous pedagogy is area in which I have a lot to learn and I can now recognize my contribution to the harm perpetuated by the institutions I participate in. As such, I also hope that in this course I can learn about how to implement Indigenous pedagogical approaches, and how to do so appropriately and with an ethic of care. Thus, my second SMART goal is:

By the end of this semester, I will be able to implement one teaching strategy for online seminars that is culturally responsive to Indigenous students’ needs and that is aligned with Indigenous pedagogical practices. To do this, I will review four to five peer-reviewed articles on Indigenous pedagogy and teaching approaches and create short summaries (much like the ones in the SOTL snapshots) for my own learning and reflection. I may decide to post them on my blog. While I would like to gauge this goal by getting feedback from an Indigenous student, I also feel that asking such a thing may be inappropriate at this time. If this is not possible, instead, when I create my teaching philosophy statement, I will integrate my new knowledge about an Indigenous pedagogical approach into my statement. I will feel successful in this goal if by the end of the semester I can describe, in detail, one teaching strategy that I can use virtually that is rooted in Indigenous pedagogy and that is appropriate for me, a white settler, to implement in a University class setting.

Similarly, I have personal experience, as a student, with student topic choice, late banks, student presentation choice (hence I am currently using a blog that I created in my undergraduate courses since that was an option for some of my previous assignments). As someone who lives with multiple mental illnesses this flexibility and responsiveness allowed me to thrive in my degree program – yet I know first-hand how many students struggle with the elite culture within academia. As someone with a sister who lives with Down Syndrome, I am constantly thinking about how I have learned to repeat instructions multiple ways and to give scaffolded guidance and reminders where appropriate (something that often does not happen with assignments at the undergraduate level). Additionally, as someone who has many peers with families, the benefits of reasonably flexible assignment deadlines are something that is of interest to me. Therefore, I would like to gain confidence in creating some new “norms” in academia that are more equitable, anti-bias, anti-racist, inclusive, and flexible. One area I see myself doing this is through assignments. Thus, my final SMART goal is:

By the end of the semester, I will be able to create assignment instructions that are rooted in inclusion and equity, such that the grading criteria is as universally accessible as possible to students from diverse cultural backgrounds, lived experiences, disabilities, and identities. I hope to learn more about universally accessible learning strategies through this course (such as the “late back” article from SOTL snapshot). My aim is to take what I learn in moments like these and keep a list of ways that these can be incorporated into an assignment I make. In order for an assignment to be accessible, so far, my list of universally accessible criteria is as follows:

  • repeat the instructions several times in several ways,
  • offer some structure but indicate where there is flexibility and student choice,
  • allow students to choose the topic,
  • offer formative feedback from either peers or a TA,  
  • offer a multi-step scaffolded assignment.
  • regarding the grading criteria: I do not want students to be graded on spelling or writing style on the first draft, but I still want there to be feedback provided. The final draft will be graded loosely for spelling and grammar in order to not penalize English language learners, folks who express themselves in a nuanced dialect, or individuals with learning disabilities.
  • offering non-academic avenues of creating the assignment, if they wish (such as a blog, reflection, poetry, or podcast) and if appropriate. I will not have a “hard” deadline that takes marks off for lateness after the initial deadline.

I will measure my success of this goal by creating a mock assignment (about anything I want, the content isn’t important to me right now). I will feel that I have met this goal if I can write the course assignment, as well as a plan for discussing and reviewing the assignment over the semester, that implements the aforementioned components. I hope to get feedback on this assignment from either an instructor, TA, or peer in this course.

Importance of Articulating Learning Goals

Personally, I felt the value in writing out those learning goals because I was able to find meaning in this learning journey and it gives me something to look forward to. During that process I felt attachment to my learning outcomes and felt a sense of responsibility for my learning build. I recognize that in creating my own goals I was able to establish some skills that I may be able to “market’ in the future, and the practice of articulating the goals now provided a clear sense of how to get from where I currently am to where I want to be. Finally, sharing these goals with instructors gave me some sense of “going public” with my learning journey, my intentions, and my interests. Making these things clear to my instructors will help them to be responsive to my interests, but also helped me to feel committed my goals since I shared them with others.  

Strategies and Checkpoints for Progress Towards Goals

In previous courses and in my research work I have created a table or excel file to keep track of items on my to-do list. While achieving these goals may not be a linear process, I believe still documenting steps towards my progress will help me understand, tangibly, where I am at in terms of my journey to “achieving” my goal. I will have to break down my goals into much smaller steps to create items that I can “check” off in my table. I have some ideas about how I can do this, but I also realize that I might have to be flexible in terms of what is attainable over the course of this semester since some of my goals require me to do additional work outside the course. What will be easiest for me is to reflect on my progress weekly, but then have three main check points during the semester where I ask myself “What is working? What is not working? What is unclear?”. Finally, I hope to use this blog to track my progress and reflect upon these learning goals throughout the semester. I will likely end up writing a post outside of the class reflections about one of these goals, because written reflection is a powerful processing tool in my toolkit. If I am to be truly successful in achieving these goals and implementing them in the future as an educator, these will be things that I have to think deeply about and integrate into my Ways of Being as an educator. Essentially, I want to “think” with these goals 6 months from now, not just vaguely recall them once I am a sessional instructor. Finally, I plan to discuss what I learned from these goals with the instructors I currently work with as a TA because they are both responsive to learning how to be better educators (they are both RECEs and Ontario Certified Teachers). So discussing what I learn with them to see if they are willing to implement any of these strategies will be another way that I can integrate these goals into my thinking and Ways of Being.

Instructor and Peer Support

What I need most from instructors and peers is to be able to “linger in generative space”. My learning process is very embodied, and I am typically a very engaged student, so I tend to like to talk things out – but sometimes can dominate the class conversation with my specific interests (i.e., in this case, information about my goals). That being said, I think that I thrive when given this choice, independence, and space to grapple with new concepts like the ones presented in my goals. For me, this looks like having discussions where my peers and I can make connections and even, at times, respectfully debating new concepts. More specifically, opportunities to discuss what I am learning about my goals during the 3-hr seminars will support and validate my feelings of being invested in my goals. I already sense that I may struggle to sit back and listen, because I feel passionate about the practice of pedagogy and I truly want to learn from this course. It will be helpful for me to be given cues from my peers or instructor about when I maybe should stop talking and let others “grapple”. In previous courses where I have been passionate about the topic I have responded well when instructors have directed me towards specific additional readings or resources that are aligned with whatever I may personally be “grappling” with (in this case it will likely be concerns about how, when, and why I can implement Indigenous pedagogical approaches as a settler). In essence, casual conversations with my peers where I can make connections about my goals to other concepts in the course will be helpful, and I ask that both instructors and peers are willing to indulge and support each other as we try this. Additionally, if I am to feel like I have achieved my goals, I will require the opportunities to implement my first goal into my micro teaching session, to write my philosophy statement where I can include what I have learned about an Indigenous pedagogical strategy (and, hopefully, be given feedback about it from the grader), and to create and discuss a mock assignment (I won’t ask for direct feedback on it from a grading perspective but perhaps it is something I can chat with Christie about in her office hours). While not all of these tasks may fall within the course parameters, I would like the opportunity to still try to do them, and to be given some feedback where appropriate, because these are the things that feel most meaningful to me, and I am opening to downsizing my goals if it I realize they are not attainable during this semester.