Faculty Development 2017session schedule
DatePresenter(s)April26, 2017

Pawel Mlodkowski

TopicContent

Number ofparticipants

New theory of thecrowding out effectThis presentation will show how fiscal expansion in the open
economy results in reduced private domestic investment spending via
a profitability channel.

6May
25, 2017

Cathrine-Mette
Mork / Catherine
Bishop / Julia
Christma

ALTSs and work so far
in ALWG

This session presents the current Active Learning Teaching Strategies(ALTSs) list and preliminary instructor survey results from the ALWG

22

June
8, 2017

Katherine Bishop
and Jason Adachi

Active Learning:
Gamification andGame-Based LearningThis session discusses the relative pedagogical merits of gamificationand game-based learning, focusing particularly on their use infacilitating active learning. Specific tools, strategies, and resources will
also be covered.

15

July 6,2017

Mr. Morishige

MEXT Symposium on
the future Teacher
Training

This session addressed “MEXT” - Improvement of the Caliber andCapability of Teachers for Future School Education - the suggested"core and curriculum including the goal of teacher training andtraining as a result of two years of research and research".

16

July 13,2017

Anne Howard

Evaluation of English
Learners

October
26, 2017

Cathrine-Mette
Mork andAnderson Passos

December
7, 2017

Jason Adachi andAlan Simpson

February.
1, 2018

Chris Johnson &James Furse

Creating individual
blogs in Mahara

E-portfolio and Rubrics
Working Group Faculty
Development Session

The CTWG will discuss
the development of
the MIC CT test andprovide example
questions from thetest. Participants will
also be provided with ageneral analysis of test
results.

This session covers how instructors express evaluation and a few
ways of making it clearer to students.

9This workshop shows participants how to help students set up theirown blog(s) in Mahara for use in a course, and how to set up ateacher e-portfolio page providing links that allow students to actively
read and comment on each other’s posts. This may be particularly
useful for content teachers who want to provide a channel forreflection and/or forum-like functionality, and for writing teachers.

9

The E-portfolio presentation explained that e-portfolios at MIC are
divided into two distinct types. The first showcases student
development through end-of-year, Study Abroad, and other studentgenerated Mahara pages. The second compiles institutionallymanaged data relevant to student progress through the academic
program. This section may include TOEIC data, grade performance,and other information that students obtain from the administration.
The rubrics underdevelopment by the Rubrics Working Group would
fit into this section as well.

17

DETAILS: The CTWG discuss the development of the MIC CT test interms of content (skills to be tested), format (what type of test
questions to develop) and delivery (when and how to develop thetest). The CTWG also provided 5 example test questions toparticipants representing a range of question types, skills tested, anddifficulty level. Information regarding students’ performance on these
5 questions, and overall participation in the CT test was also provided.
A question and answer period followed that discussed concerns about
participation rates and possible solutions; the prospects of andproblems with translating the CT test into Japanese; the importanceof not compromising research methodology and procedures; the15

1

option of restarting the research project by changing the researchmethodology and procedures; and possible interpretations of theterms of the AP grant.

2

Session Feedback Form
1. The objectives of the session were clearly defined
2. Participation and interaction were encouraged.
3. The topics covered were relevant to me.
4. The content was organized and easy to follow.
5. The session experience will be useful in my work.
6. The presenter was knowledgeable about the training topics.
7. The session length and pace were appropriate.
8. The session room and facilities were appropriate.
9. The materials distributed were helpful.
10. What aspects of this session could be improved?
11. How do you plan to apply the contents of this session to your work?
12. Additional comments.
NOTE:
Number 1 = STRONGLY DISAGREE
Number 5 = STRONGLY AGREE

3

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop (Paweł Młodkowski)
Date: April 26, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 2-103
Summary:This presentation will show how fiscal expansion in the open economy results in reduced private
domestic investment spending via a profitability channel.

Title: Profitability as a propagation mechanism of the fiscal policy in an open economy
By: Paweł Młodkowski
DETAILS:
The theoretical problem in question is the presence of the crowding-out effect in the open
economy. According to the literature so far, there is no crowding-out of private investment
expenditure by the fiscal expansion. He only crowding-out in the open economy may refer to net
exports (Larrain, Sachs 1993, p. 1999). The prominent crowding-out effect that operates throughthe interest rate channel is present in the closed economy model only. Therefore, it may be ofgreat interest for theoretical studies and of significant importance for fiscal policymakers topresent a new mechanism in this regard. In particular, the current discussion on increasing thestate support and intervention is missing this crucial argument against excessive deficits. Since
the postulated mechanism is complex and involves several stages, it is not easily perceived andnot properly interpreted. The reason for these problems in full perception and properinterpretation results from the fact of several stages between fiscal expansion and the ultimate
decrease in private domestic investment expenditure.
There are many automatic mechanisms in the free market economy that bring the economic
system back to equilibrium. One of them is the exchange rate adjustment resulting from different
real economic growth rates in trade partners. Fast growing economies experience appreciationthat makes their exports less attractive and stimulates this way economic activity in their trade
partners making imports more attractive for consumers in those fast-growing economies. Thismechanism makes economic growth, as an imbalance, disappear in the long run. Therefore, tomaintain a much higher rate of economic growth, as in Japan during 1980s, there must be someother factors and mechanisms to outweigh and neutralize the detrimental, but still a natural
response of the foreign exchange market in a form of appreciation of the domestic currency.
Appreciation of Yen started on the day of the Bretton Woods system collapsed. The fast, strong
and permanent appreciation should be a serious problem for Japanese economy that is not only
highly open, but also mostly export-oriented. Therefore, it should be a mysterious result forevery analyst to observe a dynamic and sustainable economic growth for more than one decade,4

after the systematic and permanent appreciation against the currency of the biggest trade
partner (the USA) started in 1970s. How the export-oriented industries in Japan managed toovercome competitiveness changes resulting from the strong appreciation? The answer is: byenormous investments in the Research & Development that were financed by domestic savings.
These endowments allowed for a systematic decreasing of production costs. The problems forthis scheme of dealing with appreciation driven by the relatively higher economic growth started
when the asset bubble burst. The government’s response to the recession resulted in a
substantial building up of the public debt. Due to liberalization of the BOP accounts, foreign
investors added a significant appreciation impulse that made the previously applied solution
unavailable. Profitability of domestically available investment projects decreased and the carrytrade emerged. Japan entered a period of the economic stagnation and recession that lasts forthe last 20 years. In the year 2000 this case received its name, as “the lost decade” (in Japanese:
USHI-NO WARETA JIU NEN). Today one can say that Japan has not been growing for two decades
already. There is a whole generation in that Asian society that was born and lives the entire life in
the economic recession.

Participants:
Cathrine-Mette Mork
Satoko Kimpara
Ed Rummel
Monica Hamuic
Debra Occhi
Erik Bond

5

Session Feedback - Profitability as a propagation mechanism of the fiscal policy in an open economy (Paweł Młodkowski)
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

5

5

4

5

Some
what

5

5

5

Yes

If we have some handout, it
will be nice.

Think about effectivenessof our work including
economical issues.

Thank you!

5

5

3

5

5

5

5

5

5

4

5

Some
what
Yes

5

5

5

None were
distributed
Yes

4

5

5

5

Some
what

5

5

5

None. Pawel made good use of
the time provided.

I teach 'Cultures'.
Economics is a major
reason and form ofcultural exchange.

Good learning
experience. Thanks!
More, more, like this!

None were
distributed

6

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop (Cathrine-Mette Mork, Katherine Bishop, Julia Christmas)
Date: May 25, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 2-103
Summary:This session presents the current Active Learning Teaching Strategies (ALTSs) list and preliminary
instructor survey results. The Rubrics WG will also provide an update of activities.

Title: ALTSs and work so far in ALWG
By: Cathrine-Mette Mork
DETAILS:
This FD session presented an overview of the activities of the ALWG since inception, with an
update on future plans.
The initial plan of this FD was to present was to update particularly new faculty about theactivities and progress of the ALWG and to disclose findings from the fall 2017 questionnaire sent
to faculty and students at the end of last semester. However, since money have not yet come into pay for a required upgrade to Qualtrics (the survey software), the ALWG has not been able toadequately dissect the data we have collected. This information will therefore have to wait.
The ALWG has, however, been working in the meantime on a website to serve as a repository for
ALTSs (active learning teaching strategies) at MIC. This website is not yet live and awaits approval
from MEI and MIC. It will require participation from all faculty (in the form of ALTS contribution)in order to be successful. The purpose of this site is also to serve as an area to showcase the workof the ALWG (particularly to MEXT), and hopefully other working groups as well, particularly the
Critical Thinking working group, since one of our goals is to link AL and CT skills. Looking forward,
it is hoped that this website will prove useful to faculty who want to design better teachingstrategies, particularly ones that focus on CT development. The website could potentially be
extended to participation from other institutions.

7Title: Update from Rubrics WG
By: Katherine Bishop & Julia Christmas
DETAILS:
The Rubrics Working Group discussed their plans for the first and second semesters 2017.
1. Surveys—The WG members are working on getting Qualtrics to improve the quality of datacollection and flexibility in looking at the results. The WG now has Erik to support more effective
data collection. We will be surveying faculty and students again in the Fall.
2. A sample rubric was presented by K. Bishop.
3.RWG will be working to update the institutional rubric. A Lower division rubric and an upperdivision rubric will be created based on the new three Policies.
4. Two WG members will be taking a trip to Kansai University of International Studies in Hyogo.
The purpose of the trip is a) collaboration b) better understanding of institutional rubrics c) using
the information gathered during the visit to improve the rubric and/or the institutional use of
rubrics
5. The RWG representatives fielded questions from faculty.

Participants:
Benjamin Peters
Anderson Passos
Phil Bennett
Pawel Mlodkowski
Cathrine-Mette Mork
Julia Christmas
Micheal Thompson
Satoshi Ozeki
Erik Bond
George Knapman
Anne McLellan Howard

Christopher Johnson
Aya Kasai
Katherine Bishop
James Furse
Jason Adachi
Gregory Dunne
Brendan Rodda
Edward Rummel
Jeong-Pyo Hong
Debra Occhi
Satoko Kimpara

8

Session Feedback - ALTSs and work so far in ALWG (Cathrine-Mette Mork, Katherine Bishop, Julia Christmas)
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

None

4

4

5

4

Yes

4

4

4

None were
distributed

None.

Learn more active learning
strategies and utilizationof rubric.
Make clearer connection
between critical thinking
and active learning in myclasses. Find new ways to
use rubrics, especially forstudents to evaluate theirlearning.

We want to have moreworkshop types of active
learning or rubric.
Thank you for helping
MIC's AP project succeed.
Your efforts are muchappreciated!

3

2

3

4

Somewhat

2

2

5

Yes

4

4

5

5

Yes

5

5

4

3

3

3

3

Somewhat

3

4

4

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

3

None were
distributed
None were
distributed
Yes

2

1

5

1

No

2

2

5

No

no way to apply anything

all presenters showed
total lack of respect for
the audience and no
diligence in preparing
presentations, thedisplayed merit content
was totally unreadable,
slides were unacceptablein terms of theircomposition & font size
and when it comes toother information
displayed (not PPT) thesewere just photos ofhastily handwrittencomments (totally
unreadable) on a piece ofprinted paper, as if they

everything should be improved,from the design ofpresentations to the way
presenters proceeded with themerit content, they werechaotic, there were many
digressions not related to themerit, and references to eventsand people that do not reallymatter

9

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

4

3

3

5

Somewhat5

5

5Somewhat

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

were done just 5 minutes
before presentersentered the room - MIC
students know muchbetter how to design apresentation with due
diligence and this way
they show respect for an
audience; MIC employees
should ask MIC students
for some support in thisregard to avoid suchembarrassing situationsin the future
I was much encouraged!

None

Learn more active learning
strategies and utilizationof rubric.

We want to have moreworkshop types of active
learning or rubric.

10

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop (Jason Adachi, Katherine Bishop)
Date: June 8, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 2-103
Summary:This session discusses the relative pedagogical merits of gamification and game-based learning,
focusing particularly on their use in facilitating active learning. Specific tools, strategies, andresources will also be covered.

Title: Active Learning: Gamification and Game-Based Learning
By: Katherine Bishop & Jason Adachi
DETAILS:
We examined the roles of “fun” and “play” in active learning and their utility before discussing
game-based learning and gamification in general before moving onto a discussion of MICapplication and, finally, a workshop.

Participants:
Monica Daniela Hamciuc
Micheal Thompson
James Furse
Erik Bond
Benjamin Peters
Cathrine-Mette Mork
Christopher Johnson
Anne McLellan Howard

Phil Bennett
Brendan Rodda
Futoshi Kobayashi
Debra Occhi
Mlodkowski Pawel
Edward Rummel
Satoko Kimpara

11

Session Feedback: Active Learning: Gamification and Game-Based Learning (Jason Adachi, Katherine Bishop)
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

None were
distributed

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

Somewhat

4

5

5

4

5

3

5

Somewhat

5

5

5

3

5

3

3

Somewhat

3

3

4

4

5

4

3

Somewhat

5

4

4

Yes
None were
distributed
None were
distributed
None were
distributed

3

5

3

2

No

3

2

4

Somewhat

5

None were
distributed

5

5

4

4

Somewhat

4

4

3

5

4

3

Somewhat

5

5

5

5

5

5

4

Yes

5

3

3

3

5

4

3

Somewhat

5

5

5

Yes
None were
distributed
None were
distributed

Q10

Q11

it was great as it was

mostly no new
information for me, but
enjoyed hearing fromothers on what they doLess content & more focused
Flipping through slides from alarger presentation whileothers spoke was distracting.

clearer explanation of
gamification

Q12

It would be great to create
a database of games bysubject area

Not sure yet

Students don't belong at
FD; let's not make this ahabit

try new game approaches
in my classes

Thank you Katherine and
Jason

12

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop/ Research (Fumikazu Morishige)
Date: July 6, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 2-103
Summary:
The suggested "core and curriculum including the goal of teacher training and training as a result of
two years of research and research" were presented.

Title: MEXT - Improvement of the Caliber and Capability of Teachers for Future School Education
By: Fumikazu Morishige
DETAILS:
From the Central Council for Education (CCE), (by the end of this month) the direction of the nextCurriculum guidelines (Gakushu shido yōryō) was presented, in which English language education
reform will begin in earnest. As a result of early English language education & curricularization atelementary school, and recommendations for further improvement and enhancement at middle
and upper secondary schools, it will be further required to have teachers with high English andleadership ability. In order to make the core curriculum (draft) of training and training of English
teachers proposed in 2015 more effective, in 2016, under the cooperation of many educational
committees, universities, academic societies, English educators, etc., paper and interview surveys
were conducted. Based on the proposal, the core curriculum of training and training of English
teachers was studied.

Participants:
James Furse
Jason Adachi
Benjamin Peters
Anne McLellan Howard
Anderson Passos
Cathrine-Mette Mork
Erik Bond
Futoshi Kobayashi

Debra Occhi
Christopher Johnson
Yukichi Shimizu
Phil Bennett
Edward Rummel
Gregory Dunne
Lloyd Walker
Satoko Kimpara

13

Session Feedback: MEXT - Improvement of the Caliber and Capability of Teachers for Future School Education (Fumikazu
Morishige)
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

None

We need to rethink about the teacher
certification program.

5

5

5

4

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

Morishige Sensei put a lotof times and efforts topresent us. Thank you somuch.
less slide reading?

5

5

5

4

Yes

5

4

3

Somewhat

5

4

4

5

Yes

4

4

3

Yes

5

3

4

5

Somewhat5

53Somewhat

3

3

2

3

No

3

3

3

Somewhat

4

4

1

3

No

4

3

1

5

4

3

4

Somewhat

4

4

2

Yes

5

2

4

3

Somewhat

2

4

4

Yes

The presenter just said
'read this slide' several
times; if that is the case I
would rather read it on my
own than be forced toattend another meeting

I'm sure this will
have far reaching
impact on ourwork (and could
be a great benefit
to the college if
our noble leadersdeal with iteffectively)

not sure yet

This is the second time at MIC (andthe third time overall) I've heard
about this through someone's readingof slides I could read myself more
quickly. We could have gotten the
English version for the recent
mandatory afternoon session held at
the Kiyotake hall by the MEXT officer
and Julia and not needed to take timein our busy schedules to hear about itagain here. No offense intended tothose whose efforts went into thesession, of course.

14

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop/ Research (Anne Howard)
Date: July 13, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 2-103
Summary:
How instructors express evaluation and a few ways of making it clearer to students.

Title: Evaluation of English learners
By: Anne Howard
DETAILS:
Evaluation is a very complex phenomenon in language, so much so that even native or native-likespeakers may not be aware of what goes into it. This can lead to misunderstandings when we assess
our students' performance in class, and our own attempts to soften assessment may make it evenharder to understand….

Participants:
Micheal Thompson
Erik Bond
Benjamin Peters
Cathrine-Mette Mork,
Monica Daniela Hamciuc
Jason Adachi
Edward Rummel
Anderson Passos
Satoko Kimpara

15

Session Feedback: How instructors express evaluation and a few ways of making it clearer to students (Anne Howard).
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

Please provide us some
useful techniques which are
based on research studies.

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

4

4

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

None were
distributed
None were
distributed

4

2

3

3

Yes

4

5

5

4

4

4

4

Somewhat554None were
distributed
None were
distributed

Q11

Q12
I enjoyed her presentation today.

I'll try not to kill
discussion by giving
feedback too soon!
(Thanks for the tip!)

Be more aware ofwhat kind of
feedback I give andhow I word it.

16Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop (Cathrine-Mette Mork)
Date: October 26, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: CCR 1 computer room
Summary: A workshop guiding participants on how to set up interactive student blogs/journals
in Mahara/Moodle. Rationale for doing so will be given at the start.
Title: Creating Interactive blogs/journals in Mahara
By: Cathrine-Mette Mork
DETAILS:
This workshop shows participants how to set up / or how to help students to set up student
blog(s)/journal(s) in Mahara for use in a course, how to set up a Mahara page including theblog/journal, and then how to provide links within a Moodle course to all pages of student
blogs so that students can actively read and comment on each other’s posts/entries. Thismay be particularly useful for content teachers who want to provide a channel for reflection
and/or forum-like functionality, and for writing teachers who want to provide opportunities forfluency work.
A brief overview and review of the literature supporting journaling as a form of extensive
writing across the curriculum was shared beforehand. The main rationale is gains in fluency,
accuracy, and comprehensibility of writing (in L2 specifically, but also for native writers);
gains in confidence levels and self-directed learning ability; deep learning: Students can be
asked or required to paraphrase, summarize, analyze, criticize, or offer opinions on content
they have read, watched, listened to, or experienced in or for a class. In doing so, students
discover meaning, make connections, and think critically. They can gain the perspective andinsight of others if they read each other’s journals or blogs. Journaling creates a loop thatmandates students to internalize and synthesize content instead of just cutting and pasting
information. If the content is vocational in nature, they can also instill values of theprofession and reflect on professional roles.

Participants:
Benjamin Peters
Eric Bond
Alan Simpson
Ellen Head
Debra Occhi
Jason Adachi
Jeong-Pyo Hong
Gregory Dunne
Yukichi Shimizu
17

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

5

5

5

4

Somewhat

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

None were
distributed
None were
distributed

5

4

4

4

Somewhat

5

4

5

Yes

3

5

5

5

Yes

5

3

3

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

None were
distributed
Yes

Q10

Nothing it was smashing

Q11

Q12

thinking about thiswell done!

I just made a
Mahara journal and
I was able to embed
it in a page during
the workshop so I
think I can teachstudents to do it
and exhange secreturls with theirfriends for AW 2
and Area studies
over the next 3 to 4
weeks.
I'd like to use
journalling in myclasses, if I learn
how to set it up.

thank you, great session and just at theright time for me.

Going to use more
Mahara journals in
my classes to boost
writingThanks!

18

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop/ Research Alan Simpson
Date: December 7, 2017
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: room 1-201
Summary:

E-portfolio Part:

1) Overview of e-portfolio at MIC
2) Showcasing student evidence3) Visualization of learning outcomes

4)
5)
6)
7)

Rubric Part:
Kansai International University rubric
Newly developed MIC institutional rubric
Student self-evaluation visualization
Linking grades to the institutional rubric

Title: E-portfolio and Rubrics Working Group Faculty Development Session.
By: Jason Adachi and Alan Simpson
DETAILS:
The E-portfolio presentation explained that e-portfolios at MIC are divided into two distinct
types. The first showcases student development through end-of-year, Study Abroad, andother student-generated Mahara pages. The second compiles institutionally managed data
relevant to student progress through the academic program. This section may include
TOEIC data, grade performance, and other information that students obtain from theadministration. The rubrics underdevelopment by the Rubrics Working Group would fit into
this section as well.
Rubrics
Described the Kansai International University rubric.
Introduced how the 5 diploma policies break down into 40 institutional rubric categories.
(Diploma categories need updated.)
If we are going to ask students to do a self-evaluation using these categories, then we willneed to develop 80 can do statements, with examples, bilingually. Kinki uni. do somethingsimilar, (Ellen has more info). This might be difficult to get the students to understand thequestions. We looked at example spider plot visual representations, and faculty survey
responses.
We explained two approached to link grades to the institutional rubric. First, giving thestudent class grade, to the relevant diploma policies selected in the syllabus. Second,19

selecting all of the relevant 40 categories for that class, and then assigning the grades. We
will trial this with two classes, and report to the faculty council in Jan/Feb 2018.
We will need to discuss with the e-portfolio group how to integrate it into the Mahara system.
For example, it is possible for teachers to use a rubric in Moodle, but not for students to selfevaluate. (Study the 2015-2016 Moodle course to see if there is anything useful to build on.)Participants:

Trine, Anderson, Lloyd, Ellen, Anne, Jason, Alan, Michael, James, Satoshi, Futoshi,
Debra, Chris, Phil, Ed, Aya, Erik

20

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

4

5

2

5

Somewhat

5

5

5

Yes

3

4

3

3

Somewhat4

4

4Somewhat

4

5

4

3

Somewhat2

5

4None were
distributed

The presenter stated clearly
that he was reporting
someone else's work andpled ignorance at several
points, but as he is the leader
I had expected moreexpertise. Maybe the person
who did the work shouldhave run the session?

I'm sure we'll betold how to apply it
in due course.

5

5

5

4

Somewhat

5

5

5

Yes

3

3

3

3

No

3

3

5

None were
distributed

3

3

3

3

Somewhat

3

3

3

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

It was a bespoke session to
explore ways of adapting
rubrics to fit e-portfolio
visualizations and so ofnecessity it was open ended.
I don't think it needed
improving.

It is more of aquestion of waiting
and seeing what isdecided in relation
to e portfolios andrubrics.

2

5

5

4

Somewhat

4

5

5

Yes

To get more feedback from
instructors

Develop morerubrics

5

4

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

2

2

4

2

Somewhat2

5

5

Somewhat

Concrete examples were
missing from bothpresentations.

The rubrics
presentation gave
me many ideas formy courses next
year.

Q12

I would possibly like the opportunity tocontribute a bit more to these decisions
about rubrics and e portfolios as they aregoing to affect my work in future. I would
have been happy with an even more
open-ended session but the presentation
was good and suggests that the various
committees have professors' interests atheart in terms of creating a system that is
not burdensome to teachers but is usefulto advisors.

The e-portfolio session was pretty muchthe same as last year. I believe everyone's
expectation was to see improvements
and new things, but we were left with oldscreenshots (as pointed out by one
attendee) and no suggestions for
implementation in our classes.

21

The rubric presentation had a lot of
information that could be summarized
into "ideas for future implementation".
Again, I think the attendees were
expecting to see suggestions of how to
implement things in the classroom.

22

Faculty Development Session Report
Workshop/ Research: Chris Johnson & James Furse
Date: February 1, 2018
Session Start/End Time: 16:15~17:15
Place: Room 1-201
Summary: The CTWG will discuss the development of the MIC CT test and provide example
questions from the test. Participants will also be provided with a general analysis of test results.
Title: The MIC CT Test
By: Chris Johnson & James Furse
DETAILS: The CTWG discuss the development of the MIC CT test in terms of content (skills
to be tested), format (what type of test questions to develop) and delivery (when and how todevelop the test). The CTWG also provided 5 example test questions to participants
representing a range of question types, skills tested, and difficulty level. Information
regarding students’ performance on these 5 questions, and overall participation in the CT
test was also provided. A question and answer period followed that discussed concerns
about participation rates and possible solutions; the prospects of and problems withtranslating the CT test into Japanese; the importance of not compromising researchmethodology and procedures; the option of restarting the research project by changing the
research methodology and procedures; and possible interpretations of the terms of the AP
grant.

Participants:
James Furse
Chris Johnson
Cathrine-Mette MorkAnderson Passos
Satoshi Ozeki
Erik Bond
Jason Adachi
Edward Rummel
Aya Kasai
Yukichi Shimizu
Iain Stanley
Phil Bennett
Anne Howard
Alan Simpson
Satoshi Ozeki

23

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

Free snacks and coffee fromthe AP grant budget?

My researchsometimes involves
creating testing
instruments, so it
was useful to listen
to the findings ofanother group
working in a similar
area.

5

4

3

5

Somewhat

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

Nothing could be improved,
it was perfect !

The CT test is notdirectly relevant to
my work

The discussion at the end of the session
was also useful. It highlighted one of themain problems that the AP grant has
faced - the huge disconnect between
administrators who create these plans
and faculty (and students) who have todeal with the reality of theirimplementation. I hope that future grantapplications will be planned appropriately(by drawing on expertise and involving
faculty in decisions) and that needs
analyses will be carried out before
submitting applications. I also hope that aproper evaluation of the AP grant will be
carried out so that its failings are learned
from and not repeated.
The presenters talked about "chain ofcustody". Based on their explanation it is
my understanding that this "chain ofcustody" was already compromised
because one faculty member left theroom for more than 10 minutes with acopy of the questions.
I hope this deviation is disclosed properly.
Best FD I have ever been to at MIC.

5

5

3

4

Somewhat

5

4

4

Yes

5

5

4

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

5

Yes

5

5

5

Yes

4

5

4

4

Somewhat

5

5

5

Yes

Clearer action outcomes,
namely, deciding on how andwhen to conduct the CT
tests.

I plan on
incorporating theCT thinking
categories into theinstitutional rubric.

24