Post on 27-Dec-2015
transcript
Promoting Higher Learning Outcomes in Computing
Subjects
Terry King
Dept of Information Systems
University of Portsmouth
LTSN-ICS Conference
London Aug 2001
Session Aims
Background What do we mean by Higher Learning
Outcomes Activity-Centred Curriculum Ideas-Centred Curriculum Conclude
Background
NTFS award from ILT in July 2000
Reflection on teaching style especially with postgraduates
Preoccupation with curriculum developments and students achieving higher learning outcomes
SLONE project and research
Desired inObjectives/ Used inLearning
SOLO levels Deep Surface TeachingChallenge
reflectapply: far problemshypothesise
relate to principleapply: near problemsexplainarguerelate
comprehend:main ideadescribeenumerateparaphrasecomprehend sentenceidentify, namememorise
ExtendedAbstract
Relational
Multistructural
Unistructural
Prestructural
higher-level activities missing
------------
supply TLA's to support missing activities
---------------
eliminate what supports lower verbs
Higher Learning Outcomes
John Biggs (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University.
Stages of LearningBest possiblerepresentationof learning(BPL)
Transformativelearning
Meaningful,reflective,restructured bylearner –idiosyncratic orcreative
Working withmeaning
Meaningful,reflective, wellstructured
Makingmeaning
Meaningful,wellintegrated,ideas linked
Making sense Reproductionof ideas,ideas not welllinked
Noticing Memoriserepresentation
With appropriate TLA’s can upgrade to higher stage of learning and improved BPL
Desired inObjectives/ Used inLearning
reflectapply: far problemshypothesiserelate to principleapply: near problemsexplainarguerelatecomprehend:main ideadescribeenumerateparaphrasecomprehend sentenceidentify, name
memorise
Upgrading Learning through appropriate TLA’sJ.Moon (1999)
Activity-Centred Curriculum
Activities
IDEASIDEAS
IDEAS IDEAS
IDEAS
IDEAS
IDEAS
IDEASIDEAS
Activities?
Critiques (“Crits”)
On-line Learning Journals
Use of Computer-aided Formative Assessment
Crits In Art and Design - each students work is
critiqued by the whole group - personally defend your decisions
Adapted to group-built multimedia artefacts
Each group, 2 crits each semester
Discussion on basis for the crit
Assessed group prepare report
Successful. Very rewarding
On-Line Learning Journal Assessment Journal Structure
Double-entry journal WebCT (VLE) as a recording medium
Bulletin Board - Entry/Reply structure Guidelines
Activities for Reflection Initial task - start strongly
Stages of Reflection (J.Moon, 1999)
Reflections on Journals?
Success - rewarding - reduce plagarism Serendipitous outcomes Make need for evaluation/stages explicit Accommodate different forms of reflection
eg. mind maps, images, media Must more direction at beginning (eg
views from past students)
Computer-Aided Formative Assessment
For computer-based testing need to try and relate learning outcomes to levels of learning and their relative complexity - easy to apply Bloom’s Taxonomy
Revision to Bloom’s to give an improved focus for objective questions
Examples of computer-based questions for higher learning outcomes
Applying Bloom’s Taxonomy to Objective Testing
Hierarchy of levels of learning
Subjective testing
calculate
Higher Learning Outcomes - what is possible with CAA?
Current Approaches to Designing Questions for HLO’s
From Verbs associated with HLO’s identify, categorise, distinguish,
judge, compare, contrast, determine, decide ….
Adapted current exam questions Use of exemplars
Modification to Bloom’s Taxonomy
The KnowledgeDimension
Remember Understand Apply Analyse Evaluate Create
Factual
Conceptual
Procedural
Metacognitive
Lorin Anderson and David Krathwohl (2001)
Modified Bloom’s Taxonomy to assist educators in writing learning objectives
Original 6 levels written as verbs + create last
Knowledge Dimension Factual
Terminology, Specific Details Conceptual
Categories, Principles, Theories & Models
Procedural Skills/algorithms, Techniques/Methods,
Criteria Metacognitive Knowledge
Modified Bloom’s Taxonomy The KnowledgeDimension
Remember Understand Apply Analyse Evaluate Create
Factual
Conceptual
Procedural
Metacognitive
Create / Synthesis not possible within the context of objective testing
Generation of material - more than one completely correct response
Cannot be assessed by standard commercial CAA software
X X
X X
1 2 3
Analyse/Evaluate
Analyse Differentiate Organise Attribute
Evaluate Check Critique
Learning Journal Conclusion Do not need CAA to deliver objective
questions for higher learning outcomes but .. it helps ..enhanced features
Very positive student response Good for formative assessment… but needs
monitoring/ evaluation Considerable overhead in terms of training,
time and expertise - results unclear as yet Even if commercial software - scripting
experience can be very useful Use with care for summative assessment
Problems with Activity-Centred Curriculum
Teacher-led Reductionist Ideas are drawn in on the basis of the
activities suggested- may not foster students own research/ knowledge building to wider ideas base or innovation
Ideas-Centred Curriculum
Ideas
ACTIVITIESACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIESACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES
Knowledge Building? Pedagogical approach - Shifts of focus away from
‘tasks and activities’ to ‘knowledge creation’. Allows students to create, examine and improve
ideas, and engage directly with problems of understanding
Fosters processes of ‘knowledge creation’ in day-to-day life - encourages innovation
Provides social supports for knowledge creation Sustains student work at the cutting-edge of
abilities and disciplines
M. Scardamalia, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto
Knowledge Building (KB) Principles
12 principles: Eg. Community Knowledge,
Democratising Knowledge, Idea Diversity, Improveable Ideas, etc
Expressed as the value-added to “standard best practice”
Example Knowledge Building (KB) Principle
Example: Constructive Use of Authoritative Sources
Standard best practice: Participants critically evaluate information sources and recognise that even the best are fallible
KB Value Added: Participants use authoritative sources, along with other information sources as data for their own KB and idea-improving processes.
Knowledge Building Indicators: Contributing new information; referencing and building-on authoritative sources; building bibliographies
Knowledge Forum (KF)
•Technology which models a ‘KB Community’ and enables KB
• Students activities expressed as ‘problems’ or points of focus which can be researched and developed
•Generate a database of nodes which holds all the student entries. Entries are explicit.
•Super-discussion group
•Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE)
Example of layout for a post-graduate course
Knowledge Forum
Views
Knowledge Forum Database views
Student Entry on aWeekly Reading
Student Entry on aWeekly Reading
Annotated Entry
Advantages of KF Ideas-centred learning relates to the SLONE
model for on-line collaborative group learning: Give a group a performance challenge around
which they can negotiate meaning using KF Democratisation of knowledge. Facilitates an
individuals identification with the group and their sense of belonging. Feel less like outsiders.
Promotes and enables group members to work with others to improve their own performance, helping students to buy into the group project.
Applicable to all subject areas
Conclusion•An activity-centred curriculum cannot take students past standard best practice.
•Worth experimenting with KF and KB in conjunction with activities. Especially assessment metrics.
•Example: Systems Analysis and Design case study for group solution.
•Use KF -Tease out possible solutions, make more interesting, bring in a wider range of information, help weaker students etc?
KF URL’s
www.learn.motion.com/lim/kf/KF0.html
csile.oise.utoronto.ca/