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/