teaching naked: games, customization, and learning

What an interesting chapter that considers how successful games are actually graduated learning. Good games are self-explanatory: no user manual - or textbook - required. Games teach players how to play while they play. That means that challenges, problems, quests are intuitively understood while being moderately challenging - they are doable. But each challenge successfully met is followed by another that provides another level of skill or knowledge.

Bowen argues that higher education should be the same. And this is something that is interesting for me to consider in my own courses and may explain some of the recent resistance to my courses that a few years ago were well received. I have always provided students with the resources needed to practice the course material. But I have never organized those resources in such a way that there is levelling involved. What I mean by that is that the formative feedback would be better organized in a graduated manner such that each successive problem assigned is a little more difficult to further develop students' knowledge, understanding, and skills.  A few years ago students were fine managing that on their own. More recently, however, students seem to want more guidance in terms of which problems to attend to first and which to attempt next and subsequently. Most textbook end-of-chapter problems that I assign do this fine - the first ones are easier than the last ones. But sometimes it would work better if I better-tailored sequencing of those assigned problems to how I specifically teach a course. That is, rather than simply indicating which end of chapter questions to attempt with each course section, it might be better if I were more granular by indicating which questions to attempt after each class and if there are multiple questions available, to indicate in what order the questions should be attempted.

This requires significant planning on the instructors' part.

The really important point is how to make learning into a game - make it fun and interesting. How best to highlight the course material in such a way that students will find the challenges interesting?

Is there a way, for example, to develop an online pH game?

Resources

Bowen, J. A. (2012). Games, customization, and learning. In Teaching naked: How moving technology out of your classroom will improve student learning, Chapter 3. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, an imprint of Wiley. p 51-71.

teaching naked: social proximity and the virtual classroom

In the second chapter of Teaching Naked Dr Bowen argues for instructors to use social media to make ourselves available and approachable to our students. He provides a number of examples email being the most common. But he suggests that instructors consider where their students are already meeting online outside of the classroom. He cautions against friending students personally on Facebook suggesting a workaround where a discussion board can be shared on Facebook and gently ask students to post class-related queries there rather than on our personal Facebook pages.

That is the gist of the chapter: meet students online where they already congregate. The discussion boards of most learning management systems (LMS) are fine, but they are not as easily accessible via smartphone apps compared to other options. I know that is certainly true of our Moodle installation at the University of Alberta - it is not readily accessible even when in a browser online. Bowen advocates that the online tool must be readily available and accessible to students in their daily life. If access requires pulling out a laptop, then it probably won't be a good route to communicating with students outside of class.

It would be interesting to start a course asking students how they would like me to interact with them online. But I do think it is important to set boundaries in terms of not expecting a reply on weekends or in the evening. It is critically important that we as instructors model for students how to live a balanced life. Difficult I know! But it is important that students see that we have a life outside of work. I think that can send a signal to students that we understand that they similarly have lives outside of school.

Bowen's suggestion to use Twitter as a backdoor conversation during lecture is interesting but I think that would require assistance perhaps in the form of a TA or student volunteer to moderate and raise class questions that way. I already have enough difficulty moderating the class discussion, managing my in-class personal response system, and navigating whatever else I may be projecting to the class! Having a student(s) moderate a back channel is another way of giving students responsibility for their own education. My experience is that when you do this, students rise to the challenge and take more ownership of their education as advocated by Maryellen Weimer in Learner-Centered Teaching.

Resources

Bowen, J. A. (2012). Social proximity and the virtual classroom. In Teaching naked: How moving technology out of your classroom will improve student learning, Chapter 2. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, an imprint of Wiley. p 27-49.

Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley imprint.

teaching naked: the flat classroom and global competition

In preparation for Dr Bowen's keynote at our Festival of Teaching and Learning this year, I have been reading his book Teaching Naked. I'll be posting my reading notes to my blog a couple of times a week for the month of April. By the time of his keynote, I should have read and blogged on all eleven chapters.

This is an interesting book. The first chapter explains how online learning threatens to make traditional liberal arts colleges obsolete because information and lectures are freely available online. Of course, this assumes that education is simply information transfer. Dr Bowen argues, however, that education must include interpersonal skills and critical thinking: skills that are not so easily learned online. So he makes the case to use educational technologies to leverage content coverage out of the classroom and online in order to release time inside the classroom to engage with the course material by learning how to apply and communicate it.

Bowen makes the analogy that online learning is revolutionizing education similar to how Japanese car manufacturers revolutionized the car market by producing better quality for a cheaper price. GM lost massive market share because they were unable or unwilling to change their product and how it was produced. Is the same thing going to happen to bricks and mortar colleges? Bowen thinks it will unless we focus on the advantages inherent in face to face learning when content is moved online outside of class time.

My issue with this is that students still want to have content in class rather than online. Many of my courses are taught using Team-Based Learning as the instructional strategy. I regularly receive student comments on my student evaluations of teaching complaining that they had to learn the material themselves and that if they were going to have to learn that way then they might as well take a cheaper online course. So is the problem mine in that I have not taught students what true mastery of a discipline is? Or is it that their learning curve is too great for the first contact I give them in the textbook? More likely many students do not understand that learning ultimately requires that students learn it themselves. Teaching is guiding students to do the learning.

My first-year course went ok last year when I switched to giving students an overview lecture the class before their reading quiz. My second-year course was less successful I think because I did that with less consistency. Also, I wonder if the 2nd-year textbook I choose was at too high a level for students? Effectively flipping the classroom, which is basically what Bowen is arguing for, requires careful consideration of what to expect students will be able to master on their own before discussing and working with the material in class. Expecting too much of student first contact will cause needless frustration. Expecting too little results in students not appropriately appreciating what they need to learn in class. A successful flip really does require the Goldilocks touch.

So, I think Bowen is correct in his assessment of the place of face-to-face teaching and the role that online technologies can play in freeing up time to engage students in deeper learning. I look forward to reading subsequent chapters which may address how to successfully do this given that this is a  counter-cultural approach to learning for most students.

Resources

Bowen, J. A. (2012). The flat classroom and global competition. In Teaching naked: How moving technology out of your classroom will improve student learning, Chapter 1. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, an imprint of Wiley. p 3-25.

Smith, C. V, & Cardaciotto, L. (2011). Is active learning like broccoli? Student perceptions of active learning in large lecture classes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 11(1), 53–61.

Spence, L. (2004). “The professor made us do it ourselves.” The Teaching Professor, 18(4), 6.

Van Sickle, J. R. (2016). Discrepancies between student perception and achievement of learning outcomes in a flipped classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 29–38.

Weimer, M. (2014, September 10). “She didn’t teach. We had to learn it ourselves.” Faculty Focus - The Teaching Professor Blog.

social pedagogy

What is social pedagogy?

This question first arose for me a few years ago when I started implementing e-portfolios in some of my courses and published an article on its efficacy to promote student learning outcomes. Back then there were a few articles (see below) that seemed to suggest to me that social pedagogy simply involves having students make their learning public. I found this dis-satisfying because it didn't explain to me how one makes this a requirement or how one grades it. It seems to me that it involves inviting students to publicize their learning, but then how does one assess that? My 27 years of teaching experience has taught me that unless instructors assess something, students will not attend to it. In teaching and learning, assessment is what produces value for students. If instructors do not assess it, students are being sent the message that the instructor does not value it. A bit black and white I know, but that is my sense of the interaction between students, instructors, and student learning. Granted, when students become independent learners, assessment is done by the students themselves. But that only happens after students have developed some expertise in learning and understand the value of self-assessment and how to go about engaging in the constructive criticism of their own abilities and learning.

After a short perusal of the web, it appears that some (see resources below) use social pedagogy to define a way of being in community and caring for each others' learning. I guess that could encompass e-portfolio practice. But it seems that those practitioners are advocating for living in community. Would this include e-portfolio practice? I don't understand how advocates of e-portfolio practice are invoking social pedagogy in this context.

So, back to my question: what is social pedagogy? Pedagogy involves an understanding of how teaching and learning are practised. The articles on social pedagogy in an e-portfolio context advocate for students to make their own learning public and to publically respond to the feedback they receive in the public forum. But I am having difficulty understanding how we, as instructors, support students' forays into publicizing their learning, and more importantly how we support our students' response to their peers publicized learning. The closest understanding I have is the peer review in which students provide their fellow students with constructive criticism of their peers' term papers, presentations, participation, etc. But I don't think this is really what those who have successfully implemented e-portfolios are meaning when they advocate for social pedagogy. Or rather, it is more than simply peer review, because peer review can be a private transaction between only two students. In contrast, e-portfolios are intended to make student learning public; i.e. beyond the classroom. How does this get assessed and supported?

The reason this is an issue for me is that I understand how making my learning public provokes me to really consider my thinking. Hence, why I keep this blog. But this does take courage to make public our own misunderstandings and the possibility of being found to have a mistake in our thinking - in a public forum. One has to have the courage to make learning public. So, many of my students are very reticent to open their e-portfolios to the public and encourage responses from the public. As instructors do we simply tell students to get over it and grow up? That seems a little harsh to me. What practices do instructors use to help students understand the value of making their learning public? How do we assess our students' participation in social pedagogy on both the giving and receiving end? Is it a matter of simply indicating in our e-portfolio rubric that it is a requirement for e-portfolios to be public and to not do so elicits a failing grade? That doesn't make sense to me. Rather, there must be some approach that enables students to see the value in publicizing their learning. How do we do that beyond simply assigning some marks for the number of comments they give or receive on their e-portfolios?

How do we assess students' publication of their learning in the midst of their learning? This is different from simply publishing their final paper - that is summative assessment. I want to know how to provide students with a formative assessment of their social learning.

What is social pedagogy in higher education?

Resources

Bhika, R., Francis, A., & Miller, D. (2013). Faculty professional development: Advancing integrative social pedagogy using ePortfolio. International Journal of ePortfolio, 3(2), 117–133.

Editors. (2011 May 3). What is Social Pedagogy? The Therapeutic Care Journal.

Eynon, B., & Gambino, L. M. (2017). High-impact ePortfolio practice: A catalyst of student, faculty, and institutional learning. Sterling,VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Eynon, B., Gambino, L. M., & Török, J. (2014). Completion, quality, and change: The difference e-portfolios make. Peer Review, 16(1).

Eynon, B., Gambino, L. M., & Török, J. (2014). What difference can eportfolio make? A field report from the connect to learning project. International Journal of ePortfolio, 4(1), 95–114.

Five Rivers Child Care Center. 2017. The application of social pedagogy at Five Rivers: What is social pedagogy?

Gambino, L. M. (2014). Putting e-portfolios at the center of our learning. Peer Review, 16(1).

Jensen, N. R. (2013). Social pedagogy in modern times. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(43), 1–16.

Rafeldt, L. A., Bader, H. J., Lesnick Czarzasty, N., Freeman, E., Ouellet, E., & Snayd, J. M. (2014). Reflection builds twenty-first-century professionals. Peer Review, 16(1).

Storø, J. (2013). Practical social pedagogy: Theories, values and tools for working with children and young people. Policy Press. University of Bristol.

can/should instructors force students to be metacognitive about their learning?

One of the things that I have learned about using e-portfolios as a teaching & learning strategy is that when it is a large assignment, it is unnecessary to have students complete both the e-portfolio and write the final exam. For the last couple of years, I have given students the choice between writing the final exam and preparing an e-portfolio in Augustana's fourth-year biology capstone course because there is a good correlation between what students achieve on the final exam and the final e-portfolio. This is what I found a couple of years ago when I was still requiring students to complete both the final exam and e-portfolio:


As you can see there is a significant correlation between the exam and e-portfolio marks: I only need to use one or the other to determine whether or not students have learned the material. This only works in this capstone course because the e-portfolio includes a writing dossier in which students must synthesize and digest the course readings. What I have learned is that instructors cannot force students to be metacognitive. The year that the data for the above correlation was collected, some students thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated completing the e-portfolio but there were some who felt it was a heinous assignment. I don't think learning occurs when a learner has such a visceral reaction to an assignment. I don't really understand why some students reacted so strongly against the e-portfolio when simultaneously other students gave it very high praise.

It is apparent to me from the personal comments from some alumni of the course and also from the comments I read on the anonymous Student Evaluations of Teaching that some students resented being forced to complete the e-portfolio because the assignment felt like make-work - they didn't understand the point of the e-portfolio. It is interesting that the alumni understand the objective of the assignment now a couple of years post-graduation. But the alumni thought that this sort of metacognitive ability needs to be developed over many years and to require it of students during the last term of their last year is the wrong time to do it - it is too late.

Interestingly an Augustana colleague of mine explained it to me in terms of many students in the last term of their last year have already checked out. They are either depleted or are already looking forward to the next phase of their lives. These graduating students are no longer focused on completing their degree. My colleague has observed this happen with his students when they are wrapping up their senior thesis. So, again, an argument that having students reflect on their education for the first time just before they graduate is the wrong time to do it. The whole point of students reflecting on their own learning is to have them think about how and why they learn with the goal that they will realize that there are better and poorer ways to learn and that thinking about this early in their education may produce the benefit of developing better learners. It is too late to do this in the term before students graduate. On the other hand, if students have an understanding of what it means to be a life-long learner, then it won't matter when they are asked to be metacognitive about their learning: earlier is better, but later is better than never.

One of my alumni suggested that making the e-portfolio optional is critical because not all students will be ready or willing to consider how and why they learn. Particularly in their last term of their degree. Their reasoning was that the assignment requires students to take a critical look at how and why they learn, and thus places them in a vulnerable place. It may be unsettling to critically reflect at the end of your program and realize that you have been going about learning using the wrong approach for the last four years. No wonder some students might become angry at me for forcing that realization on them. Doing this early in their learning career, however, allows them to make choices about how and why they learn - there is time for corrective action or at least a considered reason for not taking action. Just before they graduate is too late.

I had never thought how the assignment might place students in a vulnerable place. But of course, if I think about it carefully, that is the intention of such an assignment. To invite students to be vulnerable/open to reconsidering why and how they learn. At the end of a degree may be the wrong time to do that.

It requires more investigation on my part but I think the bottom line is that you cannot force students to be metacognitive. What I need to determine as a mature instructor still learning how to teach is how to enable students to realize that metacognition powerfully impacts their ability to deeply learn. And I think it involves supporting students earlier in their learning careers to be reflective about their learning as some of my past students have suggested to me. This is what I am currently attempting to do with the learning philosophy assignment which I have implemented across all year levels of the courses I teach. So far the results are promising. But, I don't force students to complete a learning philosophy - that is something they can choose to do as an optional assignment. Thus, students can be reflective about their learning when they are ready.

Can (should) instructors force students to be metacognitive about their learning? I think, as with teaching in general, all we can do is present students with the educational opportunity and then it is up to them whether or not to engage with the learning process.

Resources

Girash, J. (2014). Metacognition and instruction. In V. A. Benassi, C. E. Overson, & C. M. Hakala (Eds.), Applying Science of Learning in Education: Infusing Psychological Science into the Curriculum (pp. 152–168). Society for the Teaching of Psychology. 

Haave, N. (2016). E-portfolios rescue biology students from a poorer final exam result: Promoting student metacognition. Bioscene: Journal of College Biology Teaching, 42(1), 8–15.

developing students' mastery

Our SoTL Teaching Circle met last week to discuss the fourth chapter of How Learning Works which asks the question: how do students attain mastery? Ambrose et al explain that there are three elements to developing mastery of a skill or body of knowledge:

1. the component skills - this is knowledge of how to do something or how something works. In my mind this involves the rote portion of knowledge - learners simply need to know the language or the steps before being able to speak, think, or perform in the discipline;
2. Those component skills then need to be integrated into our existing knowledge structure. This assumes a constructivist understanding of knowledge. Until our existing mental models are restructured to incorporate the new learning, what we have just learned will not stick - it will not make sense with the rest of our worldview;
3. Finally, students need to understand in which contexts the newly learned skill may be applied. They need to know when and where our knowledge will be useful. When is it appropriate to use a hammer? When is it appropriate to use a screwdriver?

Our teaching circle discussion focused on how to develop these different aspects of mastery in our students. A common approach was to provide practice inside of our classrooms during which we as instructors can help students integrate their learning and understand when to apply their skills. Clearly, this requires aspects of active learning. And it seems that the best way to do this is to flip the classroom so that some of the component skills (rote learning) is done outside of class, before class, so that there is time inside of class to practice integrating and contextualizing the knowledge. 

But, knowing when to flip for an instructor. Sometimes students need help with the component skills (What is significant of that particular chemical structure? How is this word pronounced? What does this sentence mean?). Thus, depending upon the level of the particular course content (introductory, intermediate, advanced) will impact how much we can leave to students for the first contact with the course material and therefore how much time we have in class for nurturing students integration and contextualization of that course content.

Which means that as designers of learning experiences we need to be clear ourselves of what can be reasonably expected for students to truly learn. And I think this comes down to making choices about depth and breadth of what we teach our students. If the course has a great breadth of content, then maybe the course really needs to only expect students to develop the component skills. On the other hand, if the course objective is to have students learn the material in great depth, then maybe not as much content can be included in the course.

The difficulty I have in teaching is that I have found that learning for students does not stick very well if it is mostly breadth that they are learning. My experience suggests that when students learn something to a great depth, it has more impact on their understanding and thus the newly earned knowledge tends to stick. This seems to make sense. The pedagogical literature is clear that depth of learning produces better outcomes than superficial learning. Is that the same as breadth and depth of a course's content? I am not sure. But clearly, if we want our students' learning to be to a sufficient depth of understanding, then the course content cannot be too broad. Clearly, there is a balance between breadth and depth of content that needs to be carefully designed for each topic/discipline and the level of prior knowledge of students enrolling in the course.

Resources

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How do students develop mastery? In How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching (pp. 117–146). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley imprint.

motivating our students to learn

Our SoTL Teaching Circle met again a couple of weeks ago to discuss the third chapter of How Learning Works by Ambrose et al. All of us strive to motivate our students to learn because we understand that unless the motivation to learn and master the material exists, then learning is simply too painful to occur. Learning is difficult and time-consuming work. So, if students aren't motivated to study, they simply will not exert the effort required to learn. Ambrose et al explain in this chapter that there are a number of factors that impact students' motivation to learn. Students need to be aware of how the course material enables their ability to achieve their own goals, that the course material has value to them, and that the time and effort required to learn the material will produce acceptable results. Thus, if students do not believe that success in the course will occur as a result of their own efforts, then they will not put in the effort required to succeed. Similarly, if students do not view the particular course as contributing to their own career, professional or development goals, they will not find it worth their effort to learn.

Studies reported in this third chapter indicate that motivation is impacted by both internal and external factors and that intrinsic motivation produces better learning outcomes. Ironically, if students are learning to achieve a good grade they probably will not earn as good a mark as when they learn to master the material. Are they learning to impress someone else or are they learning for their own development as a person? Do they view learning the course material as developing their own skills that will contribute to their ability to succeed in their desired vocation?

So the task of teaching to produce successful learning is to make it apparent to students that what they are learning has significance to the students themselves. This is part of what my learning philosophy study is trying to do for students. By having students' reflect on and articulate their own learning philosophy, my hope is that they will internalize their desire to learn and thus exert the effort to become engaged rather than passive learners. Of course, there are many factors which impact our motivation to accomplish tasks, but if we can design a venue that enables students to reflect on their own values and goals and place their current coursework in the context of those learning values and goals, then this may develop the internal motivation to master the course content. As instructors, we need to facilitate and nurture students' connection to what they are learning.

Resources

Ambrose SA, Bridges MW, DiPietro M, Lovett MC, Norman MK. 2010. How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. San Francisco, CA.
Chapter 3 - What Factors Motivate Students to Learn? pp 66-90.