1 / 39

ITU Seminar on Teaching & Learning

ITU Seminar on Teaching & Learning. ITU Teaching & Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities. Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark. ( 09:00 – 10:00 ). Introduction to :.

nelia
Download Presentation

ITU Seminar on Teaching & Learning

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. ITU Seminar onTeaching & Learning ITU Teaching & Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark ( 09:00 – 10:00 )

  2. Introduction to: Constructive Alignment and Intended Learning Outcomes ITU Teaching & Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark ( 09:00 – 10:00 )

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

  4. Outline • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) Intended Learning Outcomes • How to use Intended Learning Outcomes • Relation to new Danish Grading Scale

  5. Introduction to…: • Constructive Alignment & SOLO Taxonomy: John Biggs’ popular and heavily cited book: “Teaching for Quality Learning at University - What the student does” Note: 3rd Edition now available [J.Biggs & C.Tang, 2009] “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 • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) Intended Learning Outcomes • How to use Intended Learning Outcomes • Relation to new Danish Grading Scale

  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 ! analyse ... compare ... 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 observed !

  11. Competence ! • 'Competence' as goals ! Competence:= knowledge+ capacity to actupon it Have the student dosomething; and then "observe" 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. SOLO Advantages • Advantages of The SOLO Taxonomy: • Linear hierarchical structure • Aimed at evaluating student learning • Converges on research(at SOLO 5) Research:Production ofnewknowledge

  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 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. Outline • 1) Introduction • Constructive Alignment • The SOLO Taxonomy • 2) From Content to Competence • Advocate a shift in perspective • Elaborate The SOLO Taxonomy • 3) Intended Learning Outcomes • How to use Intended Learning Outcomes • Relation to new Danish Grading Scale

  15. Concrete Recommendations (4x) 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: locategenes on chromosomes dosimple calculations : (e.g., recombination frequencies, in-breeding coefficients, Hardy-Weinberg, evolutionary equilibria). describe and performconnexion-analysis describe fundamental genetic concepts : (e.g., mutation variation, in-breeding, natural selection). describeand analyzesimple inheritancies analyzeinheritance of multiple genes simultaneously V N 4)Avoid 'understanding-goals': "Tounderstand X", "Befamiliar with Y", "Have a notion of Z", ...! N V N V V N V N V V N V 3) Use 'Verb + Noun' formulation: What the student is expected to dowith a given matter . 2) List ILO's as 'bullets': Clearer than text Student "learning checklist" Use to design Teaching/Learning Activities (TLA's) Use to design Assessment Tasks (AT's) N V

  16. The Danish Grade Scale For an excellent performance which completelymeets the course objectives, with no or only a few insignificant weaknesses. 12 A Excellent For a very good performance which meets the course objectives, with only minor weaknesses 10 B Very good Grade := Degree of realizationof course objectives! For a good performance which meets the course objectives but also displays some weaknesses 7 C Good For a fair performance which adequately meets the course objectivesbut also displays several major weaknesses 4 D Fair 02 E Adequate For a sufficient performance which barely meets the course objectives 00 Fx Inadequate For an insufficient performance which does not meet the course objectives -3 F For a performance which is unacceptablein all respects Unacceptable

  17. T Activation Exercise What are key ILO'sin YOUR course ? Concurrency: analyze systems compare models

  18. 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 Short-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

  19. From Intended Learning Outcomes to Teaching/Learning Activities ITU Teaching/Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark ( 10:30 – 10:45 )

  20. From ILO's to TLA's ITU Teaching/Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark ( 10:30 – 10:45 )

  21. Summary from Last Year Constructive Alignment and Intended Learning Outcomes

  22. Intended Learning Outcomes • From content: • ...to competence: • Intended Learning Outcomes(using verbsfrom The SOLO Taxonomy)  name recite analyze explain • Goal: understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ...  vs. Teacher Understanding?!? Student ILO's: analyze... explain... compare ... apply ... Have the student dosomething; and then "observe" product and/or process 

  23. 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

  24. The Implementation Process 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as (SOLO) intended learning outcomes alignment learning support learning incentive 3)Carefully design (TLA's): teaching/learning actitivites (intended learning outcomes) 4)Carefully design (AT's): assessment tasks (intended learning outcomes) More information on implementing alignment: [ http://www1.itu.dk/sw79909.asp ]

  25. Teaching/Learning Activities General issues

  26. 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

  27. Lecture functional knowledge teacher centric student centric Lecture declarative knowledge

  28. Student Activation "The (in-famous) Learning Pyramid": Average retention rate 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 ]

  29. 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 ... Listening vs.Doing studentlistening (to something about something) vs. student doing !!

  30. Main Point !!! • Given(carefully chosen): ILO's: analyze ... explain... compare ... apply... student-centric Design TLA's=ILO's FOCUS TODAY! Note: there is a workshop on this later today (17:35 - 18:20)

  31. Thank you ! Have a great seminar !

  32. WORKSHOP: Aligning your TLA'swith your ILO's ITU Teaching/Learning Seminar: Teaching/Learning Activities Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark ( 17:35 – 18:20 )

  33. The Implementation Process [ http://itucph.onconfluence.com/display/ILU/Study+programme+development ] 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) ILO's: analyze systems for properties (e.g. deadlock) compare models of systems (wrt. behavior) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as (SOLO) intended learning outcomes alignment learning support learning incentive 3)Carefully design (TLA's): teaching/learning actitivites (intended learning outcomes) 4)Carefully design (AT's): assessment tasks (intended learning outcomes)

  34. Workshop (groups of 3) 5' 1) Pair up (groups of 3) and choose 1-2 key ILO'sfrom your courses: • (e.g., 'to program', 'to design', 'to construct', 'to analyse', 'to relate', 'to compare', ...) 2)Design a student-centric TLAfor those key ILO's • (relating today's material to your teaching) 3) Pair up with another group andexplain your TLA • (just explain the main points and the student-centricity) 30' 2x5' Exercise on "Teaching/Learning Activities" (From ILO's to TLA's) ITU, Nov 20, 2009

  35. BONUS SLIDES - = -

  36. 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

  37. Common SOLO Competences From a study of 632x courses at NAT/(AU+SDU) ie. science context

  38. 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)

  39. Constructive Alignment TLA's (Teaching/LearningActivities) Designed to meet ILO's ILO's (Intended Learning Outcomes) Explicitly definedand communicated AT's (AssessmentTasks) Designed to assess ILO's learning incentive learning support

More Related