1 / 44

How to make sure your Students Learn what you want them to

How to make sure your Students Learn what you want them to. Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http:// www.itu.dk /people/ brabrand / ))) Associate Professor, Ph.D. Software and Systems Section IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

gullo
Download Presentation

How to make sure your Students Learn what you want them to

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. How to make sure your Students Learn what you want them to Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, Ph.D.Software and Systems Section IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark

  2. An Introduction toConstructive Alignment and The SOLO Taxonomy Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, Ph.D.Software and Systems Section IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark

  3. T Exercise: "What is good teaching?"

  4. Outline(Oct 10, 2013) • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate on The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) In Practice • Concrete recommendations • Alignment implementation process

  5. Introduction to… • Constructive Alignment & SOLO Taxonomy: John Biggs’ popular and heavily cited book: “Teaching for Quality Learning at University - What the student does” [J. Biggs & C. Tang, 2007] “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” 19 min award-winning short-film on Constructive Alignment (available on DVD in 7 languages, epilogue by John Biggs)

  6. T Neighbour Discussion: "What are the film'smain messages (in your opinion)"?

  7. Outline(Oct 10, 2013) • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate on The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) In Practice • Concrete recommendations • Alignment implementation process

  8. From Content to Competence • My old course descriptions (Concurrency 2004): • Given in terms of a 'content description'. • Essentially: • Goal is…: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... This is a bad idea for two reasons...!

  9. Problem 1 ! • Problem with 'content' as goals ! analyze ... theorize ... analyze systems explain causes define deadlock describe solutions agreement Stud. C • Goal is…: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... tacit knowledge from a research-based tradition not known by student Teacher name solutions recite conditons analyze systems explain causes Stud. B  Stud. A Censor

  10. Problem 2 ! • Problem with 'understanding' as goals ! • Goal is…: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... 'concept of deadlock' ?!  The answer is simple: It cannot be measured !

  11. Competence ! • 'Competence' as goals ! Competence:= knowledge+ capacity to actupon it Have the student dosomething; and then observe(evaluate) the product and/or process • Objective ! • To learn how to: • analyze systems for... • explain cause/effects... • prove properties of... • compare methods of... • ... Note: 'understanding' is of coursepre-requisitional !  Note':inherently operational (~ verbs) 'SOLO' = Structure of the ObservedLearning Outcome

  12. T Neighbour Discussion "How does this contentvscompetence relate to YOUR courses?"

  13. Note: the list is non-exhaustive Graphic Legend problem / question / cue known related issue - given! hypothetical related issue - not given! student response Q R R Q R Q R Q Q R R' SOLO (elaborated) QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE SOLO 2 ”uni-structural” SOLO 3 “multi-structural” SOLO 4 “relational” SOLO 5 “extended abstract” • define • identify • count • name • recite • paraphrase • follow (simple)instructions • … • combine • structure • describe • classify • enumerate • list • do algorithm • apply method • … • analyze • compare • contrast • integrate • relate • explain causes • apply theory (to its domain) • … • theorize • generalize • hypothesize • predict • judge • reflect • transfer theory (to new domain) • …

  14. SOLO verbs Mapped by: • B. Dahl & C. Brabrand (Natural science context!) With help from: • 3 Educational research colleagues (medicine) • J. Biggs & C. Tang

  15. SOLO Advantages • Advantages of The SOLO Taxonomy: • Linear hierarchical structure (good for progression) • Aimed at evaluating student learning • Converges on research(at SOLO 5) Research:Production ofnewknowledge

  16. T Exercise "Key competences in YOUR course?" Concurrency: analyze systems compare models

  17. The BLOOM Taxonomy (1956) • The BLOOM Taxonomy: Analysis Synthesis Evaluation SOLO 4+5 Qualitative Application Comprehension Quantitative SOLO 2+3 Knowledge ” ”[…] really intended to guide the selection of items for a test rather than to evaluate the quality of a student’s response to a particular item” -- (Biggs & Collis, 1982)

  18. Outline(Oct 10, 2013) • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate on The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) In Practice • Concrete recommendations • Alignment implementation process

  19. Implementation Process 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what students learnto do?) 2)Operationalize these goals and formulate them as SOLO intended learning outcomes alignment learning incentive learning support 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of assessment (~ intended learning outcomes) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  20. Concrete Recommendations 1) Use 'standard formulation': a) puts learning focus on the student b) competence formulation: "to be able to" Intended Learning Outcomes [Genetics 101] After the course, the students are expected to be able to: locate genes on chromosomes do simple calculations : (e.g., recombination frequencies, in-breeding coefficients, Hardy-Weinberg, evolutionary equilibria). describe and perform connexion-analysis describe fundamental genetic concepts: (e.g., mutation variation, in-breeding, natural selection). describe and analyze simple inheritancies analyze inheritance of multiple genes simultaneously 4)Avoid 'understanding-goals': "To understandX", "Be familiar withY", "Have a notion of Z" ! V N N V N V V V N V V N V 3) Use 'Verb + Noun' formulation: What the student is expected to dowith a given matter . 2) List sub-goals as 'bullets': Clearer than text N V

  21. Implementation Process 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what students learnto do?) 2)Operationalize these goals and formulate them as SOLO intended learning outcomes alignment learning incentive learning support 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of assessment (~ intended learning outcomes) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  22. Teaching/Learning Activities functional knowledge (problem oriented) Project work Case teaching teacher centric student centric Exercise class Lecture declarative knowledge (discipline oriented)

  23. Teacher activity: Introduce Explain Elaborate Discuss application Give examples Show PPT slides Questions on slides Winding up Student activity: Listen Listen (maybe take notes) Understand? (correctly? deeply?) Listen (maybe take notes) Listen (maybe take notes) Watch (maybe note points) Write answers to questions Possibly ask a question Lecture (about Application) vs. active teacher [ Biggs & Tang 2007, p.137 ] vs. passive student

  24. Learning(about): about application about cooking about programming about designing about analysis about construction about relating ... Learning (to do): to apply to cook to program to design to analyse to construct to relate ... Learn about vs. Learn to do studentlistening (to something about something) vs. student doing !!

  25. Student Activation "The (in-famous) Learning Pyramid": Average retention rate Note: these percentages are "bogus" 5% Lecture Listening: Learning about passive student 10% Reading 20% Audiovisual student activation 30% Demonstration active student 50% Discussion group 75% Practice by doing Doing: Learning to do 80% Teaching others [ NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, Bethel, Maine ]

  26. Constructive Alignment • Make explicit ILO's ( ) • (…and tell this to students) Intended Learning Outcomes = ILO's= Teaching LearningActivities Assessment vs. SUSAN: intrinsically motivated ROBERT: extrinsically motivated

  27. R Q R' Questions... Cognitive processes My research and teaching Course descriptions "understanding" content  competence Association new ~ old The SOLO Taxonomy 'TLA' Teaching / Learning Activities Teacher models levels 1 - 2 - 3 The Film The Book Susan & Robert ? Student activation Tips'n'Tricks CS v. NAT v. MAT recite generalize 15% programming Students at University "What is good teaching?" Constructive Alignment John Biggs Top Competences

  28. T Now, please: "2-minute recap" • Please spend 2' on thinking about and writing down the most important points from the talk – now!: Immediately After 1 day After 1 week After 2 weeks After 3 weeks

  29. Key References • ”Teaching for Quality Learning at University”John Biggs & Catherine TangSociety for Research into Higher Education, 2007. McGraw-Hill. • ”Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy”John Biggs & Kevin F. CollisLondon: Academic Press, 1982 • ”Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding”Claus Brabrand & Jacob Andersen19 minute award-winning short-film (DVD)Aarhus University Press, Aarhus University, 2006 • "Constructive Alignment & The SOLO Taxonomy: a Comparative Study of University Competencies in Computer Science vs. Mathematics"Claus Brabrand & Bettina DahlCRPIT, Vol. 88, ACS 3-17, R. Lister & Simon, Eds., 2007

  30. Thank You! Film's homepage: ((( http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ )))

  31. Tips'n'Tricks (activation) • Neighbour discussions: • Post-It exercise: • Form variation: • focus: zoom in • anonymous (!) • swap'able • everyone will engage • empathetic control • shared knowledge pool • more questions(students dare ask them) • better questions(students had a chance to discuss) [Phil Race] 1-2 min timeout • Frequent breaks: pulse reader measurements: lecturing blended with in-class activation exercises

  32. NEW OLD Tips'n'Tricks (cont'd) • Use many examples:(build on student pre-knowledge) • Explicit structure: • Student 'recap' at end: 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww  • self evident to you [ teacher ] • not to a learner [ student ] (esp. during learning process) • "Less-is-more": • analyze • compare • relate common deadlock, uncommon deadlock, A-synchronization, B-synchronization, hand-shake, multi-party synchronization, multi-party hand-shake, binary semaphores, generalized semaphores, blocking semaphores, recursive locks, ... vs. now after 1 day after 1 week after 2 weeks after 3 weeks Emphasize depth over breadth (coverage)

  33. Problematic Courses • E.g. course: ”Databases”(at RUC/Roskilde): • Note: almost entirely non-operational(!) • i.e. measure how?! • obtain knowledgeaboutthe structure of database systems; • be familiar withdesign of databases by useof special notations like E/R and analysisthrough normalization; • get an overview ofthe most important database models and a detailed knowledgeabout the most important model - the relational model as well as the language SQL; • get an overview ofdatabase indexing and query processing; • obtain knowledgeabout application programming for DB systems. Familiar with ?!

  34. UNALIGNED COURSE  Teacher’s intention Student’s activity • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply "Dealing with the test" Exam’s assessment • e.g. • memorize • describe • e.g. • memorize • describe

  35. ALIGNED COURSE  Teacher’s intention Student’s activity • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply Exam’s assessment • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply • e.g. • explain • relate • prove • apply

  36. Student Motivation • Susan: (”intrinsic motivation”) - wants to…: learn ! • Robert: (”extrinsic motivation”) - to…: pass exams!

  37. Constructivism • ”Transmission is Dead…”: (lectures = ) • Knowledge is…Actively Constructed! ! active teacher & passive students risk

  38. SOLO Taxonomy • Hierarchy for Competences: • Deep learning (not surface) ! 5: generalize, theorize, predict, … 4: explain, analyze, compare, … 3: describe, combine, classify, … 2: recite, identify, calculate, …

  39. Stud Learning Focus • Focus on Student Learning ! (instead of ”what teacher does” & labelling students: ’good/bad’) • Studentactivitation  learning

  40. Alignment • Make explicit ILO’s (Intended Learning Outcomes): • (…and tell this to students) Exam =ILO’s= Teaching

  41. Acquisition of Competence • Acquisition of competence progresses according to the following stages of learning: • 1)Unconscious incompetence • 2)Conscious incompetence • 3)Conscious competence • 4)Unconscious competence • 5) Capacity for moving consciously between stages 3) and 4):(which is required by a teacher)

  42. On the Role of Examination • Constructive Alignment: • A systemic theory (a teaching system w/ cause/effects) • A theory of planning (over the course of a course) • A theory of motivation (and incentive) • From the exam as a...:...to: "The exam does not come after, but before the course!" "Necessary evil" application of alignment Motivational and learning-guiding pedagogical tool for the teacher(!)

  43. Definition: “Good Teaching” • Definition: • Good news (we now know how to do this): • Alignment!!! • Explicitly defined course objectives(as verbs)! • Discourage surface-learning! • Encourage depth-learning! • “Less-is-more”:depthrather than breadth of coverage! ”Good teaching is getting most students to use the higher cognitive level processes that the more academic students use spontaneously” -- “Teaching for Quality Learning at University”, John Biggs, 2003

  44. The SOLO Taxonomy (1982) SOLO 1:(Pre-Structural) • Here the subject does not have any kind of understanding but uses irrelevant information and/or misses the point altogether. Scattered pieces of information may have been acquired, but they are unorganized, unstructured, and essentially void of actual content or relation to a topic or problem. SOLO 2:(Uni-Structural) • The subject can deal with one single aspect and make obvious connections. The subject can use terminology, recite (remember things), perform simple instructions/algorithms, paraphrase, identify, name, count, etc. SOLO 3:(Multi-Structural) • At this level the subject can deal with several aspects but these are considered independently; i.e., not in connection with one another. Metaphorically speaking; the subject sees the many trees, but not the forest. He or she is able to enumerate, describe, classify, combine, apply methods, structure, execute procedures, etc. SOLO 4:(Relational) • At level four, the subject may understand relations between several aspects and how they might fit together to form a coherent whole. The understanding forms a structure and now he or she sees how the many trees form a forest. A subject at this level may compare, relate, analyze, apply theory, explain in terms of cause and effect, etc. SOLO 5: (Extended Abstract) • At this level, which is the highest, the subject may generalize structure beyond what was given, may perceive structure from many different perspectives, and transfer ideas to new areas. He or she may generalize, hypothesize, criticize, theorize, etc.

More Related