1 / 27

Transforming Teaching and Learning in Health Education Using Cognitive Complexity Assessments

Learn how to develop cognitively complex assessment items based on Bloom's Revised Taxonomy, and how to apply them in pre-service and in-service settings. Explore the process of developing these assessments and the training procedures involved. Understand the importance of clear objectives in creating appropriate instruction and assessment. Discover how cognitive complexity assessments can enhance teaching and learning in health education.

cosette
Download Presentation

Transforming Teaching and Learning in Health Education Using Cognitive Complexity Assessments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ASHA Conference Louisville, KYOctober 15, 2011 Transforming Teaching and Learning in Health Education by Developing Cognitively Complex Assessment Items Nancy Hudson, Coordinator of the Health Education Assessment Project (HEAP), CCSSO Kathleen Middleton, President, ToucanEd, Inc.

  2. Objectives for this Session Participants will be able to: • Describe how Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (BRT) formed the foundation for the HEAP assessment progressions of increasing cognitive complexity • Apply the training procedures for HEAP’s cognitive complexity progressions teaching tool • Analyze the potential for application for use in pre-service and in-service settings.

  3. The Process • HEAP Members wanted to develop more cognitively demanding assessment items for formative assessment • Recognized that training was needed • Chose to develop sets of items based on the BRT & NHES • Members of the HEAP’s Item Development Committee led the effort. Modified existing HEAP constructed responses • Reviewed by Lorin Anderson. Cog sets revised and finalized based on his suggestions • Collaboratively developed through the HEAP’s Web-based System Item Development Tool • HEAP members determined the training process • ToucanEd designed and published the Cog Set Training Kit

  4. Bloom’s Taxonomy • Benjamin S. Bloom • 1912–1999 • Notable work:1956Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1 The Cognitive Domain

  5. Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (BRT) • Lorin W. Anderson • Former student of Bloom • Notable work with David R. Krathwohl (eds.): 2001 A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA

  6. The sign is CONTENT.

  7. A text book is content.That’s why each text has a “table of content(s).”

  8. But back to the sign

  9. Using the word “objective” when applied to the sign, the question becomes: What does the highway department intend us to learn from the sign? (or, alternatively, Why is the sign there?)

  10. Do they want us to UNDERSTAND why bridges ice before roads? Do they want us to APPLY that knowledge to our driving? Do they want us to ANALYZE the weather and driving conditions to see whether the sign applies? Do they want us to EVALUATE the effectiveness of the sign in reducing traffic accidents and fatalities? Do they want us to CREATE a sign that is more likely to accomplish the intent of the sign?

  11. The same content can lead to a variety of quite different objectives. Objectives must be clear in order to create appropriate instruction. Clear objectives provide the basis of appropriate assessment.

  12. Bloom’s Bloom’s Revised • Evaluation • Synthesis • Analysis • Application • Comprehension • Knowledge • Creating • Evaluating • Analyzing • Applying • Understanding • Remembering

  13. Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

  14. How we process that content may produce different results. • Consider the content in a recipe. • How we process the content may produce different knowledge results.

  15. Four Types of Knowledge Classifications/categories, principles, theories, models Conceptual Subject skills and techniques, criteria for determining correct use of procedures Procedural Metacognitive • Strategic knowledge, • self awareness

  16. If you possess conceptual knowledge,you CAN cook and you ARE a cook. If you possess metacognitive knowledge, you are on the verge of becoming a CHEF.

  17. When you combine: The six verbs (cognitive process categories) with The four types of knowledge you get a two-dimensional table that we call TheTaxonomy Table

  18. The Taxonomy Table

  19. Cognitive Complexity in Health Education • Using BRT, HEAP adapted existing assessments items to create a series of new items with increasing levels of complexity. • Moves students along a continuum of more demanding learning by linking the HEAP skill cues for the NHES with the cognitive processes of BRT. • Provides opportunities for formative assessment in classroom. • Brings a higher level of cognitive demand to both teaching and learning.

  20. Teaching with the Assessment in Mind • Assessment requires teachers to examine what needs to be taught. Teachers need to: • Provide the knowledge processes necessary to answer the prompt, • Ensure that students understand what the prompt is asking of them (understand all terms), • Provide instructional activities that enable students to do well on the assessment.

  21. Example- AI Cog Set • Scenario Set-up: Heidi's class has been asked to create a bulletin board display on preventing HIV/AIDS. Heidi and her classmates have identified the local health department and MTV as sources of information. She has also identified the following criteria to determine if these resources are valid sources of information: • Validity Criteria* Currency – the timeliness of the information* Relevance – the importance of the information for your needs* Authority – the source of the information* Accuracy – the reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the information content* Purpose – the reason the information exists.

  22. Progression of Prompts • Understanding: In your own words, explain the meaning of each criterion Heidi used to determine the validity of the sources she chose. • Applying: Illustrate how Heidi would use validity criteria to determine if the sources she chose are valid. • Analyzing: Differentiate the two sources of information on HIV/AIDS based on validity criteria. • Evaluating: Evaluate each source in terms of their validity, justifying your judgment. • Creating: Create a bulletin board display of sources that provide information on preventing HIV/AIDS. Your bulletin board should contain valid sources of information and types of services that students can access to prevent HIV. Prepare a summary of the process you used to determine the validity of your sources.

  23. Time for You to Experience the Results of our Efforts

  24. Questions and Resources • Did you find this exercise helpful? • How might you use this in your education setting? • What might you need to further your capacity to use this resource?

  25. This PPT can be found on the HEAP website – http://scassheap.org • Another example of the cog sets can be found on this site too, as well as lots of free resources • The Cog Sets Training Sets are available through ToucanEd – www.toucaned.com/HEAP

  26. Coming Together For a Brighter Future www.ccsso.org On twitter: @ccsso

More Related