Table 2 Observation protocol for Awl project
Discussion One | Discussion Two | Discussion Three | Discussion Four | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
What’s moral? | What’s right? | Am I responsible? | How do I do it? | |
Dosage | ||||
Date | ||||
Start time | ||||
Stop time | ||||
Total minutes | ||||
Adherence | LoU (1 to 3) | LoU (1 to 3) | LoU (1 to 3) | LoU (1 to 3) |
Discussion of core questions | What’s moral? Is this a moral situation? | What’s right? What should one do? | Am I responsible? Why be “good”? | How do I do it? What skills and will are needed? |
Core question score | ||||
Instruction of key concepts | Haidt’s five “Instuitive Ethics” | Three levels/lenses of reasoning | Mechanisms of moral disengagement | Performance and moral character (Skill & Will) |
Key concepts score | ||||
Use of AwI activity protocol | AMAP | EDMA | VIPA | SWAP |
Protocol score | ||||
Delivery | QoD (1 to 5) | QoD (1 to 5) | QoD (1 to 5) | QoD (1 to 5) |
Active engagement: The extent to which students are actively engaged in the discussion(s) related to the core question. | ||||
Providing information: The extent to which the teacher presents and describes the key concepts and/or skills related to the core question. | ||||
Procedural practice: The extent to which students practice using the concepts and/or skills being presented (e.g., use of AMA.) | ||||
Clarity of oraganization: The extent to which the lesson as a whole is clearly organized. | ||||
Positive affect: The extent which the teacher demonstrates enthusiasm for topic during lesson. |