Reflections – After the event
The feedback from the session, was mostly positive, and had the WOW factor, according to 2 of my peers.
Eyes literally lit up when I got the boxes out of my bag. There was a little disappointment when they realized that the Celebrations box was not filled with chocolates, but the LEGO seemed to be a good consolation prize. I don’t know if I would have got away with anything less!
I forgot to explain at the beginning, the purpose of the task, going straight into the instructions for the activity. However, this seemed to work in my favour according to the feedback, as it increased the anticipation and element of surprise at the end of the activity.
Comments:
“A quick, fun and effective way to make a very important point about plagiarism (and I teach IP, so it’s a really helpful idea)”
“The WOW factor, surely! Such a straightforward depiction of what referencing means and why it is important.”
It was suggested that less time could have been spent on the building of the LEGO creations, however, that was a little contentious, as most felt that it was good to have that time to develop a connection/ownership over their creation, thus increasing the impact at the end.
Another commented that there could have been more on the referencing of material.
The original activity that I based my session upon, Buckley, (2015), was much longer and had follow-up referencing activities.
I did consider the possibility of reducing the building time and trying to squeeze in another activity, however, on reflection, I am glad that I left it as it was.
If I were to run the session again with more time, I would include further activities and more discussion to support and reinforce the learning outcomes.
Only one participant said that they had, at one point during the building of her LEGO creation, wondered what LEGO had to do with anything, but that she was enjoying herself too much, she forgot to ask the question. This is something that is noted In Buckley’s (2015) session.
So, all in all a successful teaching session, using active learning to generate engagement which allowed those taking part to learn by connecting new ideas and experiences to what they already knew, which supports the constructivist learning theory.
If I were to run the session again, I would provide some written instructions too as a reminder. Some students were so engrossed in building their LEGO that they forgot they needed to use LEGO from 3 different boxes, which I had to remind them of.
I believe the Learning outcomes were achieved. All peers/students engaged with the activity and seemed to understand the purpose of the activity. The LEGO bricks being a metaphor for intellectual ideas and theories and the importance of referencing when using others’ ideas to develop our own.
Two peers said that they would use the same activity in their own teaching sessions.
Buckley, C (2015), ‘Conceptualising Plagiarism: Using Lego to construct students’ understanding of authorship and citation’, Teaching in Higher Education, 20(3), pp. 352-358. DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2015.1016418. https://dio.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1016418. Accessed: 28/1/2023