Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory Transportation Classes - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory Transportation Classes PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 6cbbfb-YWQ0O



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory Transportation Classes

Description:

Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory Transportation Classes Karl A. Smith Engineering Education Purdue University – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:116
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 86
Provided by: Karl146
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory Transportation Classes


1
Design and Implementation of Active and
Cooperative Learning in Large Introductory
Transportation Classes
Karl A. Smith Engineering Education Purdue
University Civil Engineering - University of
Minnesota ksmith_at_umn.edu - http//www.ce.umn.edu/
smith/ Transportation Education
Conference Portland, OR June 2009
2
It could well be that faculty members of the
twenty-first century college or university will
find it necessary to set aside their roles as
teachers and instead become designers of learning
experiences, processes, and environments.
James Duderstadt, 1999 Nuclear Engineering
Professor Dean, Provost and President of the
University of Michigan
3
objectives for engineering practice, research,
and education To adopt a systemic,
research-based approach to innovation and
continuous improvement of engineering
education, recognizing the importance of
diverse approachesalbeit characterized by
quality and rigorto serve the highly
diverse technology needs of our society
http//milproj.ummu.umich.edu/publications/EngFlex
20report/download/EngFlex20Report.pdf
4
Workshop Layout
  • Welcome Overview
  • Integrated Course Design (CAP Model)
  • Content
  • Assessment
  • Pedagogy
  • Active Cooperative Learning
  • Informal Bookends on a Class Session
  • Formal Problem-Based Cooperative Learning
  • Design and Teamwork Features
  • Wiggins McTighe Backward Design Approach
    Course, Class or Lab Session, and Learning Module
    Design From Objectives and Evidence to
    Instruction
  • Wrap-up and Next Steps

5
Session Objectives
  • Participants will be able to
  • Develop/refine rationale for Active and
    Cooperative Learning
  • Describe key features of Cooperative Learning,
    especially interdependence and accountability
  • Apply cooperative learning to classroom practice
  • Make connections between cooperative learning and
    desired outcomes of courses and programs
  • Describe key features of the Backward Design
    process Content (outcomes) Assessment -
    Pedagogy

6
  • Session Summary
  • (Minute Paper)
  • Reflect on the session
  • What were the most important points for you?
  • What is one thing you will take away?
  • What questions do you have?
  • Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast
  • Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots
  • Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah

7
Transportation Education June 2009 Workshop 1
Q4 Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (2.8) Q5
Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (3.8) Q6
Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (3.5)
8
MOT 8221 Spring 2009 Session 1
Q4 Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (3.3) Q5
Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (4.2) Q6
Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (4.4)
9
Workshop 1 Reflection and Dialogue
  • Individually reflect on the first workshop
    write for about 1 minute
  • Key ideas, insights, applications
  • Questions, concerns
  • Discuss with your neighbor for a about 2 minutes
  • Select one comment, question, etc. that you would
    like to present to the whole group if you are
    randomly selected

10
Background Knowledge Survey
  • Familiarity with
  • Approaches to Course Design
  • Wiggins McTighe Understanding by Design
    (Backward Design)
  • Felder Brent Effective Course Design
  • Fink Creating Significant Learning Experiences
  • Active and Cooperative Learning Strategies
  • Informal turn-to-your-neighbor
  • Formal cooperative problem-based learning
  • Research
  • How People Learn
  • Student engagement NSSE
  • Cooperative learning
  • Responsibility
  • Individual course
  • Program
  • Accreditation

11
MOT 8221 2009 Background Survey
PM Q1
PMI Q2
KM Q3
Leadership Q4
EngSys Q5
N 30/30
IE/OR Q6
Mod/Sim Q7
CAS Q8
MgmtSci Q9
6 Sigma Q10
11
12
Spread Q1
PM Q2
Stat Q3
Mod/Sim Q4
DB Q5
Prog Q6
KM/ES Q7
N 30/30
12
13
Effective Course Design
(Felder Brent, 1999)
ABET EC 2000
Blooms Taxonomy
Course-specific goals objectives
Classroom assessment techniques
Technology
Cooperative learning
Students
Assessment
Other experiences
Tests
Other measures
Lectures
Labs
14
CAP Design Process Flowchart
15
CAP Design Process (Shawns Model)
Start
Context
Content
Cloud of alignment
Assessment
Pedagogy
End
16
Resources
  • Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., Cox, M. 2009.
    Supportive teaching and learning strategies in
    STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving
    the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM
    fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning,
    117, 19-32. San Francisco Jossey-Bass.
  • Bransford, Vye and Bateman Creating High
    Quality Learning Environments
  • Pellegrino Rethinking and Redesigning
    Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

17
Designing Learning Environments Based on HPL (How
People Learn)
18
Backward DesignWiggins McTighe
  • Stage 1. Identify Desired Results
  • Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence
  • Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences
  • and Instruction

Wiggins, Grant and McTighe, Jay. 1998.
Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA ASCD
19
Backward Design
  • Stage 1. Identify Desired Results
  • Filter 1. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process represent a big idea or
    having
  • enduring value beyond the
    classroom?
  • Filter 2. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process reside at the heart of
    the discipline?
  • Filter 3. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process require uncoverage?
  • Filter 4. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process offer potential for
    engaging
  • students?

20
Backward Design
  • Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence
  • Types of Assessment
  • Quiz and Test Items
  • Simple, content-focused test items
  • Academic Prompts
  • Open-ended questions or problems that
  • require the student to think critically
  • Performance Tasks or Projects
  • Complex challenges that mirror the
    issues or
  • problems faced by graduates, they are
    authentic

21
Understanding Understanding Stage 1. Identify
Desired Results Focus Question What does it mean
to understand? Stage 2. Determine Acceptable
Evidence Focus Questions How will we know if
students have achieved the desired results and
met the standards? What will we accept as
evidence of student understanding and proficiency
(Wiggins McTighe)
22
  • Understanding Misunderstanding
  • A Private Universe 21 minute video available
    from www.learner.org
  • Also see Minds of our own (Annenberg/CPB Math and
    Science Collection www.learner.org)
  • Can we believe our eyes?
  • Lessons from thin air
  • Under construction
  • Teaching Teaching Understanding Understanding -
    http//www.daimi.au.dk/brabrand/short-film/index-
    gv.html

23
Some Important Principles About Learning and
Understanding
  • The first important principle about how people
    learn is that students come to the classroom with
    preconceptions about how the world works which
    include beliefs and prior knowledge acquired
    through various experiences.
  • The second important principle about how people
    learn is that to develop competence in an area of
    inquiry, students must (a) have a deep
    foundation of factual knowledge, (b) understand
    facts and ideas in the context of a conceptual
    framework, and (c) organize knowledge in ways
    that facilitate retrieval and application.
  • A third critical idea about how people learn is
    that a metacognitive approach to instruction
    can help students learn to take control of their
    own learning by defining learning goals and
    monitoring their progress in achieving them.
  • Jim Pellegrino Rethinking and redesigning
    curriculum, instruction and assessment What
    contemporary research and theory suggests

24
Taxonomies Blooms taxonomy of educational
objectives Cognitive Domain (Bloom Krathwohl,
1956) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing A revision of Blooms taxonomy of
educational objectives (Anderson Krathwohl,
2001). Evaluating the quality of learning The
SOLO taxonomy (Biggs Collis, 1982) Facets of
understanding (Wiggins McTighe, 1998) Taxonomy
of significant learning (Dee Fink, 2003)
25
The Cognitive Process Dimension
Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
Factual Knowledge The basic elements that students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve problems in it. a. Knowledge of terminology b. Knowledge of specific details and elements
Conceptual Knowledge The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that enable them to function together. a. Knowledge of classifications and categories b. Knowledge of principles and generalizations c. Knowledge of theories, models, and structures
Procedural Knowledge How to do something methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms, techniques, and methods. a. Knowledge of subject-specific skills and algorithms b. Knowledge of subject-specific techniques and methods c. Knowledge of criteria for determining when to use appropriate procedures
Metacognitive Knowledge Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of ones own cognition. a. Strategic knowledge b. Knowledge about cognitive tasks, including appropriate contextual and conditional knowledge c. Self-knowledge
The Knowledge Dimension
Imbrie and Brophy, 2007
26
Shaping the Future New Expectations for
Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics,
Engineering and Technology National Science
Foundation, 1996
Goal All students have access to supportive,
excellent undergraduate education in science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology, and all
students learn these subjects by direct
experience with the methods and processes of
inquiry. Recommend that SMET faculty Believe
and affirm that every student can learn, and
model good practices that increase learning
starting with the students experience, but have
high expectations within a supportive climate
and build inquiry, a sense of wonder and the
excitement of discovery, plus communication and
teamwork, critical thinking, and life-long
learning skills into learning experiences.
27
Lila M. Smith
28
Pedago-pathologies Amnesia Fantasia Inertia Lee
Shulman MSU Med School PBL Approach (late
60s early 70s) Stanford University, Past
President of the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of College Teaching Shulman, Lee S.
1999. Taking learning seriously. Change, 31
(4), 11-17.
29
What do we do about these pathologies? Lee
Shulman Activity Reflection Collaboration
Passion Shulman, Lee S. 1999. Taking learning
seriously. Change, 31 (4), 11-17.
30
Lila M. Smith
31
Pedagogies of Engagement
32
MIT Harvard Engaged Pedagogy
January 2, 2009Science, Vol. 323
www.sciencemag.org
January 13, 2009New York Times http//www.nytimes
.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?em
Calls for evidence-based teaching practices
33
http//web.mit.edu/edtech/casestudies/teal.htmlvi
deo
34
http//www.ncsu.edu/PER/scaleup.html
35
Cooperative Learning Positive Interdependence In
dividual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face
Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group
Processing
36
Cooperative Learning Research Support Johnson,
D.W., Johnson, R.T., Smith, K.A. 1998.
Cooperative learning returns to college What
evidence is there that it works? Change, 30 (4),
26-35. Over 300 Experimental Studies First
study conducted in 1924 High Generalizability
Multiple Outcomes
Outcomes 1. Achievement and retention 2.
Critical thinking and higher-level reasoning 3.
Differentiated views of others 4. Accurate
understanding of others' perspectives 5. Liking
for classmates and teacher 6. Liking for subject
areas 7. Teamwork skills
January 2005
March 2007
37
Faculty interest in higher levels of inquiry in
engineering education
  • Level 0 Teacher
  • Teach as taught
  • Level 1 Effective Teacher
  • Teach using accepted teaching theories and
    practices
  • Level 2 Scholarly Teacher
  • Assesses performance and makes improvements
  • Level 3 Scholar of Teaching and Learning
  • Engages in educational experimentation, shares
    results
  • Level 4 Engineering Education Researcher
  • Conducts educational research, publishes archival
    papers

Source Streveler, R., Borrego, M. and Smith,
K.A. 2007. Moving from the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning to Educational Research
An Example from Engineering. To Improve the
Academy, Vol. 25, 139-149.
38
Active Learning Cooperation in the College
Classroom
  • Informal Cooperative Learning Groups
  • Formal Cooperative Learning Groups
  • Cooperative Base Groups

See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL
College-804.doc)
39
Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves
people working in teams to accomplish a common
goal, under conditions that involve both positive
interdependence (all members must cooperate to
complete the task) and individual and group
accountability (each member is accountable for
the complete final outcome). Key
Concepts Positive Interdependence Individual
and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive
Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing
40
Individual Group Accountability
  • ?

41
http//www.ce.umn.edu/smith/docs/Smith-CL20Hando
ut2008.pdf
42
Book Ends on a Class Session
43
  • Book Ends on a Class Session
  • Advance Organizer
  • Formulate-Share-Listen-Create (Turn-to-your-neighb
    or) -- repeated every 10-12 minutes
  • Session Summary (Minute Paper)
  • What was the most useful or meaningful thing you
    learned during this session?
  • What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as
    we end this session?
  • What was the muddiest point in this session?

44
Advance Organizer The most important single
factor influencing learning is what the learner
already knows. Ascertain this and teach him
accordingly. David Ausubel - Educational
psychology A cognitive approach, 1968.
45
Quick Thinks
  • Reorder the steps
  • Paraphrase the idea
  • Correct the error
  • Support a statement
  • Select the response
  • Johnston, S. Cooper,J. 1997. Quick thinks
    Active- thinking in lecture classes and televised
    instruction. Cooperative learning and college
    teaching, 8(1), 2-7.

46
  • Formulate-Share-Listen-Create
  • Informal Cooperative Learning Group
  • Introductory Pair Discussion of a
  • FOCUS QUESTION
  • Formulate your response to the question
    individually
  • Share your answer with a partner
  • Listen carefully to your partner's answer
  • Work together to Create a new answer through
    discussion

47
Minute Paper
  • What was the most useful or meaningful thing you
    learned during this session?
  • What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as
    we end this session?
  • What was the muddiest point in this session?
  • Give an example or application
  • Explain in your own words . . .
  • Angelo, T.A. Cross, K.P. 1993. Classroom
    assessment techniques A handbook for college
    teachers. San Francisco Jossey Bass.

48
  • Session Summary
  • (Minute Paper)
  • Reflect on the session
  • 1. Most interesting, valuable, useful thing you
    learned.
  • 2. Things that helped you learn.
  • 3. Question, comments, suggestions.
  • Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast
  • Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots
  • Instructional Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah

49
MOT 8221 Spring 2009 Session 1
Q4 Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (3.3) Q5
Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (4.2) Q6
Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (4.4)
50
Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with
Concept Tests Physics Peer Instruction Eric
Mazur - Harvard http//galileo.harvard.edu Pee
r Instruction www.prenhall.com Richard Hake
http//www.physics.indiana.edu/hake/ Chemistry
Chemistry ConcepTests - UW Madison
www.chem.wisc.edu/concept Video Making
Lectures Interactive with ConcepTests ModularChem
Consortium http//mc2.cchem.berkeley.edu/ STEM
TEC Video How Change Happens Breaking the
Teach as You Were Taught Cycle Films for the
Humanities Sciences www.films.com Harvard Thi
nking Together From Questions to Concepts
Interactive Teaching in Physics Derek Bok
Center www.fas.harvard.edu/bok_cen/
51
Richard Hake (Interactive engagement vs
traditional methods) http//www.physics.indiana.ed
u/hake/
Traditional (lecture)
Interactive (active/cooperative)
ltggt Concept Inventory Gain/Total
52
(No Transcript)
53
The Hake Plot of FCI
35.00
SDI
30.00
ALS
WP
25.00
20.00
PI(HU)
15.00
ASU(nc)
WP
10.00
ASU(c)
HU
5.00
0.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
Pretest (Percent)
54
Physics (Mechanics) ConceptsThe Force Concept
Inventory (FCI)
  • A 30 item multiple choice test to probe student's
    understanding of basic concepts in mechanics.
  • The choice of topics is based on careful thought
    about what the fundamental issues and concepts
    are in Newtonian dynamics.
  • Uses common speech rather than cueing specific
    physics principles.
  • The distractors (wrong answers) are based on
    students' common inferences.

55
Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Can be
used at any time Can be short term and ad hoc May
be used to break up a long lecture Provides an
opportunity for students to process material
they have been listening to (Cognitive
Rehearsal) Are especially effective in large
lectures Include "book ends" procedure Are not as
effective as Formal Cooperative Learning or
Cooperative Base Groups
56
Active Learning Cooperation in the College
Classroom
  • Informal Cooperative Learning Groups
  • Formal Cooperative Learning Groups
  • Cooperative Base Groups

See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL
College-804.doc)
57
Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups
58
http//www.aacu.org/advocacy/leap/documents/Re8097
abcombined.pdf
59
Top Three Main Engineering Work Activities
  • Engineering Total
  • Design 36
  • Computer applications 31
  • Management 29
  • Civil/Architectural
  • Management 45
  • Design 39
  • Computer applications 20

Burton, L., Parker, L, LeBold, W. 1998. U.S.
engineering career trends. ASEE Prism, 7(9),
18-21.
60
  • Teamwork Skills
  • Communication
  • Listening and Persuading
  • Decision Making
  • Conflict Management
  • Leadership
  • Trust and Loyalty

61
Design team failure is usually due to failed team
dynamics (Leifer, Koseff Lenshow, 1995). Its
the soft stuff thats hard, the hard stuff is
easy (Doug Wilde, quoted in Leifer,
1997) Professional Skills (Shuman, L.,
Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J.,
The ABET Professional Skills-Can They Be Taught?
Can They Be Assessed? Journal of Engineering
Education, Vo. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 4155.)
62
Teamwork
63
  • Characteristics of Effective Teams
  • ?

64
A team is a small number of people with
complementary skills who are committed to a
common purpose, performance goals, and approach
for which they hold themselves mutually
accountable SMALL NUMBER COMPLEMENTARY
SKILLS COMMON PURPOSE PERFORMANCE GOALS
COMMON APPROACH MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY --Katzen
bach Smith (1993) The Wisdom of Teams
65
Hackman Leading Teams
  • Real Team
  • Compelling Direction
  • Enabling Structure
  • Supportive Organizational Context
  • Available Expert Coaching

Team Diagnostic Survey (TDS)
https//research.wjh.harvard.edu/TDS/
66
  • Professor's Role in
  • Formal Cooperative Learning
  • Specifying Objectives
  • Making Decisions
  • Explaining Task, Positive Interdependence, and
    Individual Accountability
  • Monitoring and Intervening to Teach Skills
  • Evaluating Students' Achievement and Group
    Effectiveness

67
  • Formal Cooperative Learning Types of Tasks
  • Jigsaw Learning new conceptual/procedural
    material
  • 2. Peer Composition or Editing
  • 3. Reading Comprehension/Interpretation Read
    the paper/chapter and answer a set of questions
  • 4. Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation
  • 5. Review/Correct Homework
  • 6. Constructive Academic Controversy
  • 7. Group Tests Individual exam followed by
    group exam

68
Challenged-Based Learning
  • Problem-based learning
  • Case-based learning
  • Project-based learning
  • Learning by design
  • Inquiry learning
  • Anchored instruction

John Bransford, Nancy Vye and Helen Bateman.
Creating High-Quality Learning Environments
Guidelines from Research on How People Learn
69
Challenge-Based Instruction
with the Legacy Cycle
https//repo.vanth.org/portal/public-content/star-
legacy-cycle/star-legacy-cycle
69
70
Kolbs Experiential Learning Cycle
Concrete Experience
Testing implications of concepts in new situations
Observation and Reflections
Formulation of abstract concepts and
generalizations
71
5 E Learning Cycle Model
  • Engage
  • Explore
  • Explain
  • Elaborate
  • Evaluate

http//faculty.mwsu.edu/west/maryann.coe/coe/inqui
re/inquiry.htm
72
Problem-Based Learning
73
Problem Based Cooperative Learning Format TASK
Solve the problem(s) or Complete the
project. INDIVIDUAL Estimate answer. Note
strategy. COOPERATIVE One set of answers from
the group, strive for agreement, make sure
everyone is able to explain the strategies used
to solve each problem. EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR
SUCCESS Everyone must be able to explain the
strategies used to solve each problem. EVALUATION
Best answer within available resources or
constraints. INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY One
member from your group may be randomly chosen to
explain (a) the answer and (b) how to solve each
problem. EXPECTED BEHAVIORS Active
participating, checking, encouraging, and
elaborating by all members. INTERGROUP
COOPERATION Whenever it is helpful, check
procedures, answers, and strategies with another
group.
74
http//www.udel.edu/pbl/
75
Cooperative Base Groups
  • Are Heterogeneous
  • Are Long Term (at least one quarter or semester)
  • Are Small (3-5 members)
  • Are for support
  • May meet at the beginning of each session or may
    meet between sessions
  • Review for quizzes, tests, etc. together
  • Share resources, references, etc. for individual
    projects
  • Provide a means for covering for absentees

76
  • Session Summary
  • (Minute Paper)
  • Reflect on the session
  • What were the most important points for you?
  • What is one thing you would be willing to try?
  • What questions do you have?
  • Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast
  • Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots
  • Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah

77
MSU Spring Institute 2008 Session 1
Q4 Pace Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (2.8) Q5
Relevance Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (4.3) Q6
Format Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (4.3)
78
Backward Design ModelWiggins McTighe
  • Stage 1. Identify Desired Results
  • Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence
  • Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences
  • and Instruction

Wiggins, Grant and McTighe, Jay. 1998.
Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA ASCD
79
Backward Design
  • Stage 1. Identify Desired Results
  • Filter 1. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process represent a big idea or
    having
  • enduring value beyond the
    classroom?
  • Filter 2. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process reside at the heart of
    the discipline?
  • Filter 3. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process require uncoverage?
  • Filter 4. To what extent does the idea,
    topic, or
  • process offer potential for
    engaging
  • students?

80
Backward Design Approach
  • Desired Results (Outcomes, Objectives, Learning
    Goals)
  • 5 minute university
  • Evidence (Assessment)
  • Learning Taxonomies
  • Plan Instruction
  • Cooperative Learning Planning Format Forms

81
The Cognitive Process Dimension
Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
Factual Knowledge The basic elements that students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve problems in it. a. Knowledge of terminology b. Knowledge of specific details and elements
Conceptual Knowledge The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that enable them to function together. a. Knowledge of classifications and categories b. Knowledge of principles and generalizations c. Knowledge of theories, models, and structures
Procedural Knowledge How to do something methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms, techniques, and methods. a. Knowledge of subject-specific skills and algorithms b. Knowledge of subject-specific techniques and methods c. Knowledge of criteria for determining when to use appropriate procedures
Metacognitive Knowledge Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of ones own cognition. a. Strategic knowledge b. Knowledge about cognitive tasks, including appropriate contextual and conditional knowledge c. Self-knowledge
The Knowledge Dimension
A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing
A revision of Blooms taxonomy of educational
objectives (Anderson Krathwohl, 2001).
82
Taxonomies Blooms taxonomy of educational
objectives Cognitive Domain (Bloom Krathwohl,
1956) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing A revision of Blooms taxonomy of
educational objectives (Anderson Krathwohl,
2001). Evaluating the quality of learning The
SOLO taxonomy (Biggs Collis, 1982) Facets of
understanding (Wiggins McTighe, 1998) Taxonomy
of significant learning (Fink, 2003) A taxonomic
trek From student learning to faculty
scholarship (Shulman, 2002)
83
Backward Design
  • Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence
  • Types of Assessment
  • Quiz and Test Items
  • Simple, content-focused test items
  • Academic Prompts
  • Open-ended questions or problems that
  • require the student to think critically
  • Performance Tasks or Projects
  • Complex challenges that mirror the
    issues or
  • problems faced by graduates, they are
    authentic

84
Backward Design
  • Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences Instruction
  • What enabling knowledge (facts, concepts, and
    principles) and skills (procedures) will students
    need to perform effectively and achieve desired
    results?
  • What activities will equip students with the
    needed knowledge and skills?
  • What will need to be taught and coached, and how
    should it be taught, in light of performance
    goals?
  • What materials and resources are best suited to
    accomplish these goals?
  • Is the overall design coherent and effective?

85
Design and Implementation of Cooperative
Learning Resources
  • Design Framework How People Learn (HPL)
  • Creating High Quality Learning Environments
    (Bransford, Vye Bateman) -- http//www.nap.edu/o
    penbook/0309082927/html/
  • Design Backward Design Process (Felder Brent,
    Dee Fink and Wiggins McTighe)
  • Pellegrino Rethinking and redesigning
    curriculum, instruction and assessment What
    contemporary research and theory suggests.
    http//www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm
  • Content Resources
  • Donald, Janet. 2002. Learning to think
    Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco
    Jossey-Bass.
  • Middendorf, Joan and Pace, David. 2004. Decoding
    the Disciplines A Model for Helping Students
    Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. New
    Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.
  • Pedagogies of Engagement - Instructional Format
    explanation and exercise to model format and to
    engage workshop participants
  • Cooperative Learning (Johnson, Johnson Smith)
  • Smith web site www.ce.umn.edu/smith
  • University of Delaware PBL web site
    www.udel.edu/pbl
  • PKAL Pedagogies of Engagement
    http//www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagem
    entSummit.cfm
About PowerShow.com