Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning: Weekly Teaching Tips, 2012 - 13

Dear Faculty,
The Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) is here to help identify resources and best practices for our students’ learning. As the CETL explores how to identify resources from within, examples from outside of our own institution may be helpful as well. Regis University joined the Teaching Issues Writing Consortium for 2012-2013. This group includes faculty and teaching and learning centers from across the US and Canada. Each member of the Consortium provides a distinct teaching issue and a way to go about addressing that issue. Every week, the CETL hopes to provide one of these for your own development and adaptation for your teaching environment. Look for them to be posted on Monday afternoons. Some may be useful, some not and we will do our best to match them up with the ebb and flow of the semesters/courses. If you have specific questions about the resource, please contact Ken Sagendorf (at 964-6469), Director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.

Here is what I know today. In one month, finals will be over for the fall full semester. Same for the 8 week courses. Less than that for the 5 week courses (now in their third week). Regardless of the length of the course you are teaching, it is an ideal time to revisit the 9 institutional outcomes. The ‘Regis Nine’ as they are affectionately known can be found on page 15 of the Regis University Catalog. I have trouble getting it to load off of our website so I will share here for your reading ease (and pleasure):

All students graduating from Regis University should have:

·         In-depth knowledge of a discipline or content area.

·         Knowledge of diverse cultures, perspectives, and belief systems.

·         Knowledge of arts, sciences, and humanities.

·         Ability to think critically.

·         Ability to communicate effectively.

·         Ability to use contemporary technology.

·         Commitment to ethical and social responsibilities.

·         Commitment to leadership and service to others.

·         Commitment to learning as a lifelong endeavor

I share this as the week’s teaching tip for a couple reasons. First and foremost, I have personally drunk the Kool-aid and am an outcome person. I believe that we should be designing everything we do here – courses, curricula, co-curricular activities, administration, etc. – toward ensuring that our students are able to have, do, and feel these things. If you haven’t noticed, there are three knowledge outcomes, three skill outcomes, and three affective (or attitude) outcomes. Some may recognize them as the KSA’s of Regis. Second, I talk with many faculty and when conversation leads to these outcomes, many are unaware that they exist. They are extremely difficult to find on our website and it is very cranky when downloading the document (especially in Internet Explorer). Also, it can become easy to believe that accreditation standards of our respective disciplines actually define what our students should know, learn, and feel. However, these should be partners – our institutional outcomes and accreditation standards. And, not or.

Finally (and very selfish of me), I share the Regis nine this week as a segue into the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) (http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/The_Degree_Qualifications_Profile.pdf) and the call for faculty participation in a National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA) workshop to support the DQP. Super quickly, the DQP is the work of the Lumina Foundation and has the support of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). The Lumina Foundation has been a long-time funder of work in higher ed, especially for underrepresented students and especially focused on creating an environment conducive to learning and supporting learners that may be “low income students, students of color, first-generation students and adult learners.” The DQP sets forth a collection of criteria by degree – associates, bachelor’s and master’s. In each area, they list and describe what a students should know and be able to do when they receive a degree. Now, before you stop reading, the list does include disciplinary content but focuses in on the intellectual skills, the integrative and specialized knowledge, as well as the civic and applied learning for each degree. And the report shares how degrees at different types of institutions may lean more toward certain of these criteria than others. My summary does little to explain the complexities of what they lay out as a proposed framework of higher ed. Nor is it meant to. I really just want to try and get you to not discard my email directly because what comes next is really important.

NILOA. The National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Now, if you are still reading after the DQP paragraph, that word assessment may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back but HOLD ON! Attached you will find a call for faculty participation in a collaboration to create a library of high-quality and peer-endorsed assignments. In their words, it is really about faculty regaining control for assessing outcomes, rather than being told what to do by someone else. Just like the work of your CETL is to bring faculty together to share and refine their practice, NILOA is trying to do this on a national level. It is about creating and sharing assignments that really get at some of the students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes. And they pay!

If I can help with information about the DQP, the work of NILOA, or the Regis Nine, please let me know. And have a great day.

Be well,

Ken

Please forgive the tardiness of this week’s teaching tip. There is a video that was released and discussed on Inside Higher Education yesterday. The video, by an African-American male student at UCLA, shares the perspective of a student and diversity at their own institution. It can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEO3H5BOlFk.

This week, as Regis University hosts its own Diversity, Engagement, and Inclusion Conference (Wednesday through Friday – see the InSite posting for more details and how to attend), I share this video with a collection of questions instead of answers. After you watch the video, I invite you to consider the following:

· What would the videos made by your students look like? Would they be similar to this one? Why or why not?

· Would your students make videos that are similar to other students in your classes? What makes one student’s experience at our university different from another’s?

· How do we engage these student experiences in our classrooms in ways that respect those experiences, value them, and seek to learn from and with them?

FYI: The piece from Inside Higher Ed can be found here: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/11/11/students-video-leads-discussion-race-ucla

Call for participation in the Celebration of Student Learning on Dec 3^rd.

If you have a class that is doing some good work and showing their learning in unique ways, please consider signing up to have those students present or discuss their learning at the Celebration of Student Learning on December 3^rd. The flyer is attached. Please contact me to sign up or if you have any questions.

In this week’s teaching tip, I share an article that a friend of mine sent to me early this morning from a discussion at another institution. This article was in the Wall Street Journal at the end of September and represents a conversation that surfaces every so often – that we as educators need to be ‘tougher.’ The article can be found here: http://dml.regis.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/wallstreetjournal/docview/1437231534/fulltext/1418AA6D3D38235BFB/1?accountid=28590. I think these kind of articles make it extremely difficult to figure out what the research on effective teaching and learning really is and how we interpret and use it for the benefit of our students.

I present this to you with a couple comments and questions aligned with the points of the article:

“A Little Pain is Good for You” - Comment 1: Learning is often difficult, especially when you are requiring critical thinking, synthesis or creativity. Daniel Willingham, a cognitive psychologist, wrote a book a couple years ago called “Why Don’t Students Like School” (available in our library:https://lumen.regis.edu/search~S3?/awillingham/awillingham/1%2C6%2C10%2CB/frameset&FF=awillingham+daniel+t&2%2C%2C2) adding some explanation to this phenomena. Other research will agree that high expectations of students should be held and feedback to students should be honest but given in a way in which it can be used by the students. But, be careful about the author’s first point as we are not usually developing experts in all of our courses. Therefore, the famous work of Ericsson may not be as applicable to you as the author claims. Question 1: How do you give feedback to your students and how is it used by them?

“Drill, Baby, Drill” - Comment 2: Although much of the work used in the article is actually pointed at K-12 education (see the reference in this section regarding the 2008 Dept. of Education report), the average reader can easily misinterpret that this applies directly to college teaching as well. Memorization is important – sometimes. It just shouldn’t be all the time in our classrooms. And, if memorization is needed in your courses, make sure that what the students are memorizing is in service of something larger and it is not the end state of their learning. Consider requiring memorization outside of the “class” time. Question 2: Can students memorize and succeed on your quizzes? If you answer yes, the conditioning that students may be experiencing will lead to less critical thinking, analysis, creativity, etc.

“Failure …,” - Comment 3: In his book, “What the Best College Teachers Do,” one of my favorite authors, Ken Bain, explains his research on college faculty – especially with regard to two types of ‘failure.’ The first, he explains, is the positive use and set up of an “expectation failure” – a “situation where a student’s existing mental model will lead to faulty expectations, causing the student to realize the problems they face in believing whatever they believe”. But, an effective teacher must not only set up these situations for students to have the expectation failure but must work with students to have them “try, fail, receive feedback, and try again.” Thus, Bain proposes a way to conduct courses and scaffold students’ navigation in this kind of learning. So, I would agree, some kinds of failure can be good for learning. Question 3: What does failure look like in your courses?

“Grit …,” – Comment 4: However, Bain also balances this with need to support the student and their learning. We need to have an expectation that students will continue to strive to get to the top. But, there are likely few clones of Sisyphus in our student bodies. Even the story of Sisyphus leads us to believe that the act of pushing a rock to the top of a mountain only to have it roll down again and have to repeatedly push it back up was a punishment. Question 4: Is there a place for student perseverance in your course? How do you know when it is the right amount to facilitate student success and not too much to undermine their learning?

“and Praise.” – Comment 5: The author’s portrayal of the detriments of praise relate to 10 year olds and the benefits of stress use examples of mental ‘toughness’ that speak more to physical stress than mental curiosities. It is hard to make direct connections to our own classes. With that in mind, it does raise questions about the conditioning students experience in our courses. Question 5: What do you praise students for in your courses? What does this praise support? Students’ Learning? Effort? Just ‘getting it’?

How would you comment on this article and what questions would you have about your own courses?

I know it is late in the afternoon but I have been thinking hard on this week’s teaching tip email. I am not sure if you know but the Teaching Tips come from multiple places. They may come from the international consortium that I belong to with other Teaching and Learning Centers. They may come from a conversation I have with a faculty member or from the recent headlines of higher ed publications.

It doesn’t happen too often but the Teaching Tip may also come from personal experiences I have had. This week’s is that kind of example. Yesterday, my family and I returned for the first time to the church we had moved away from last year. We were looking forward to being there, seeing old friends, and hearing the new priest. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you read this email), it was pledge Sunday – that day when the priest grounds the amount we should give to the church in the scripture. At least that has always been the way I perceived it and I admittedly usually tune out when that conversation starts. As we no longer go to church there, I was able to listen to the message a little differently this time. The priest shared a passage from the Bible (Matthew 6: 19-21) and one line in particular stood out to me: “for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

It was a normal Sunday morning for me and I happened to thinking about effective teaching and student learning (as I am sure you were as well!) and that line from Matthew caught me. Admittedly, I have never before quoted the bible in my professional life so I am little tentative here but it makes so much sense in terms of teaching and learning. If I interpret the phrase correctly, the ‘treasure’ refers not singularly to objects like money but also (and more importantly) to that which we value – our values. The message that your values should dictate your actions or you reap what you sow is not singularly a Christian ideal. There are, in fact, similar messages in the Jewish faith (thank you to Russ Arnold in Regis College for the assist here) and in the Buddhism concept of Karma (thanks go to Linda Land-Closson for helping me make this connection).

Here is how I have been thinking about it. It is just past midterms. Now is the ideal time to look at our classes from a bigger perspective. And I think the sentiment of the message prompts us on how to do so. Here is what I am suggesting.

1. Look at how points are assigned in your own classes. Students may consider points in class as your ‘treasure.’

2. Ask yourself if the place where your courses’ points are is really what you value or not. For example, if you value critical thinking but you give out a certain percentage of your points for extra work or for turning work in on time or for participation, does this match those values?

If you answer yes, job well done. If not, how can your course be changed so that your course’s treasure is truly where its heart is? If we institutionally value a practice of enhancing our students’ learning, we need to ask and seek answers to these types of questions.

Let me know if you would like to discuss. I will be in my office trying to rearrange the grading in my course …

A week ago, a Regis University colleague graciously shared a book with me: Derek Bok’s Higher Education in America. Perhaps you may recognize the author’s name. He was a Harvard University president. He also penned the book, Our Underachieving Colleges back in 2006 (as well as some other great titles). In his latest book, he skillfully outlines the issues facing higher education today. He does so by sharing the history of higher ed over the centuries and pointing out growth areas as well as areas of stagnation. This is what is wonderful about Bok as an author. Despite being the president of one of the premier institutions on the planet, he was always (and continues to be) looking for what we should do better. His thinking is based in the research and he often bluntly points out where we can own our lack of progress and even offers suggestions for potential changes.

In one chapter describing college teaching, he contrasts college faculty members’ desire to have students think critically with the most common method of teaching: lecturing. But before a reader can think “this no longer applies to me because I don’t lecture,” Bok shares survey results that over 90% of faculty believe that their teaching is above average and see no need to change. He also shares some great research where professors are exposed to students’ notes after a lesson in order to compare the messages transmitted with what students receive (hint: they don’t match up well). This is Bok’s way of writing – to bring you to the edge of dismissing the argument and then hitting you with research results which make you question your own practice.

In his book he outlines steps to make potential changes:

1. Spend much of your ‘class’ time having students grapple with problems raised by their reading and homework;

2. Explain to students what your course and each lesson is designed to do. Explain why you think it is important and why it matters (over and over again);

3. Hold onto your high expectations;

4. Give students repeated opportunities to test their abilities and receive prompt feedback (in this feedback, tell them what they have mastered and what they need work on – and don’t count these toward their grades);

5. Have students reflect on their thinking and the strategies they used to search for answers. Devote time to helping students with this.

6. Finally, Bok states, “take pains to ensure that [your] teaching methods, the problems [you] assign, and [your] examinations are each tightly aligned with the objectives of the course. In this way, all of the efforts students make, including the questions they are asked to answer and the problems that are assigned, will be directed toward acquiring the knowledge, skills [and affect] that you are trying to nurture.”

While I am not one to ever say there is a recipe for effective teaching, these are really some very blunt statements that, if followed, likely will lead to the deep kind of learning that you want from your students.

On Friday, the Regis College Faculty took a day to reflect about their work and its meaning. It is a good idea to do this so often and hope that you are your colleagues do so on a regular basis.

On this Monday following that event (and coupled with a milestone birthday last week), I find myself with more questions this morning than I have answers. ‘What does it all mean?’ is one of the big questions I am wrestling with. In pondering such a meaningful question, this short read came to mind: http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/philosophy-of-teaching/remembering-our-mission-to-teach/. This article reminds me that my mission is to teach students and what that means. It frames the mission as the key to ask and seek answers to the questions: How do faculty members, energize, reignite, and in some instances, recapture that which motivates our work with students? What contributions are we making to the lives of the students we teach? Have we become derailed from the mission to contribute to others in a profound and significant way? And, if so, how do we get back on track? It also proposes two overall responsibilities that teachers have – to promote thinking deeply and to build relationships. Both of these contributions represent and respect a mission to teach and influence the lives of others.

On the existential side, the second question I am wrestling with is “Am I doing it (my life, my job, and, especially, my teaching) the right way?” I don’t like this question because it is so hard to answer. At work, I often get a similar question from faculty: “what is the best way to teach (insert your content or desired skill here)?” In the teaching and learning center world, I despise this question. The reason for this personal feeling is that I need so much context to even begin to formulate a thought. I need to know about you and your skills. I need to know about your students and their skills. I need to know about students’ feelings about your course, about their world, etc. Without this knowledge, I can’t begin to effectively answer this question. Yet, I feel some pressure to respond and respond quickly. Together we can brainstorm the answers but there is likely not a single answer – just like our institution doesn’t have a single answer. The second piece I share with you today addresses the question of ‘what works?’ Find that article here:http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/what-works-in-the-messy-landscape-of-teaching-and-learning/

Whether you are in the middle of your semester or at the end of an accelerated course, pondering your own answers to the questions of what are we doing and how should we do it can be fruitful. I offer this week’s teaching tip as intellectual stimulus and vegetable-like nutrition for you as a teacher and I encourage you to discuss your answers with each other.

I sincerely hope that you had a great weekend.  Perhaps you had a little time to reflect.  Maybe you didn’t.  Finding time for reflection is hard.  And at this time of the year, it is likely that you are busy just doing.  Our students are likely no different.  Whether you are approaching mid-semester or in the beginnings of an accelerated course, taking the time to have your students think about how they are learning is a useful thing.  It takes time to do but this week’s teaching tip offers a quick and useful way to have your students think about their thinking and how they are learning in your courses.  The Teaching Tip comes to Regis courtesy of Freya Kinner from Western Carolina University.  Find it below:

You turn a test back to your students. They look at their papers, and you span the room. Your students’ visages are telling – some look shocked, others proud, and still others are hurt or even bored. Perhaps one or two students ask to meet with you after class to “talk about their grade” or ask for the dreaded extra credit assignment. But, how often do they ask themselves how their studying approach (other than perhaps amount of time spent studying) affected their performance? Do they analyze their feedback to see if there were particular content areas they struggled with? Particular test item types?

In other words, do your students ever stop and take stock, whether of a test, an in-class activity, an assignment, or a conversation?

We work in a world of quick transitions and immediate gratification, and we seldom take the time to stop, look inward, and take stock. If we do, we often don’t use that “stock” to make changes or plans for the future. This is where metacognition plays a key role. Simply put, metacognition is thinking about thinking. It includes:

·         becoming aware of how we learn (cognitive awareness),

·         monitoring our learning strategies and evaluating how well those learning strategies work (self-regulation), and

·         adapting our learning strategies when and if needed (Flavell, 1979).

In general, students who use metacognitive strategies (i.e., plans or techniques used to help students become more aware of what and how they know) tend to have higher performance than students who do not use metacognitive strategies (e.g., Ertmer & Newby, 1996; Lovett, 2008; Nett, Goetz, Hall, & Frenzel, 2012). One way to helps students take stock and learn about metacognitive strategies is through a variation on the gallery walk, wherein you ask students to reflect on both their academic successes and failures.

First, introduce the concept of metacognition (including awareness, monitoring, and adaptation), and ask students to think about their academic successes and failures. Ask students to write responses to the following prompts on sticky notes:

Think about a time when…

o   you learned a lot. What did you do?

o   a writing assignment was particularly successful. What did you do to make it successful?

o   you performed particularly well on a test. How did you prepare?

o   you just didn’t “get it.” What were you doing at that moment?

o   a writing assignment failed. How did you work through the assignment?

o   you failed a test. How did you prepare?

Students place their responses to each prompt on separate charts (one chart per prompt) placed around the room. You (the instructor) facilitate a whole group conversation, walking from chart to chart (in essence, you’re taking a “gallery walk” with each chart a work of art). What are common characteristics across students’ successes? Their failures? What were the students doing in each of those situations? How are the characteristics related to awareness, monitoring, and adaptation? Through this process, students see a pattern in their collective academic successes and struggles.

Then, ask students, “Based on the gallery walk and what we’ve learned about metacognition, how will you plan differently for your next assignment/project/exam?” This final question could be addressed through a minute paper, a take-home assignment, or another chart in the gallery walk.

Resources:

Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J., (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional Science, 24, 1–24.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.

Lovett, M.C. (2008). Teaching metacognition. Paper presented at the annual EDUCAUSE meeting, Orlando, FL.

Nett, U. E., Goetz, T., Hall, N. C., & Frenzel, A. C. (2012). Metacognition and test performance: An experience sampling analysis of students' learning behavior. Education Research International, 1-16.

Let’s be honest with each other for a moment.  There is a lot of thinking that ‘lecture’ has a bad connotation and so many of us have turned to discussion or ‘facilitated discussion’ as our main mode of teaching.  This is great, please don’t misinterpret my meaning.  However, students don’t always recognize the
difference in the role they play or the importance of effective oral communication.  This week’s teaching tip, courtesy of Dr. Claudia Stanny in the Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment at the University of Central Florida, helps students define, evaluate, and help each other better engage in and communicate during class discussions – both in the face-to-face classroom and the online environment.  The full text is below, including a link to the original article referenced within (and there is a hidden teaching tip in each issue of that publication!).

We often focus on presentation skills as oral communication skills, but students more frequently need to either lead or contribute to productive group discussions. Small group discussions can easily go off the rails when students indulge in off-topic talking, inadequate listening, and disrespectful behavior. The dynamic quality of class discussion presents challenges to faculty who would like to hold students accountable for the quality of their participation in these discussions.

Multhaup (2008) describes how to prepare students for substantive class discussions and suggests two strategies for evaluating student contributions to class discussion. Many of these strategies can be adapted for the online environment.

Establish ground rules for effective class discussion (first week of class)

Establish expectations for class discussions by facilitating a think-pair-share activity during the first week of the term.

Think. Ask students to reflect silently on the characteristics of great class discussions they’ve experienced and identify things that undermine a good discussion.

Pair. Students discuss their thoughts in pairs (not naming any specific courses, professors, or students).

Share. Bring the class together as a group and ask pairs to discuss the highlights of their discussion.

Use the comments from the group discussion to identify some ground rules and expectations for individual participation in class discussion during the remainder of the term.

Adaptation for eLearning: Create a threaded discussion based on questions such as

·         What kinds of contributions to an online discussion make the thread worth reading?

·         What kinds of contributions help you learn course concepts?

·         What kinds of contributions are not helpful?

Peer evaluation of the quality of participation in discussion

Require students to complete a Participation Survey 3 or 4 times during the term. Each student must complete the following three evaluation elements for every student in the class, including themselves:

1.      [Student name]: needs to talk more / talks about the right amount / needs to talk less

2.      [Student name] 6-point rating of the quality of contributions to discussions (1 = unacceptable, added nothing to discussions, 6 = outstanding, comments in every class have been helpful)

3.      Open-ended comment about the student’s role either as a discussion facilitator or participant

Compile the collective (anonymous) feedback for individual students and distribute this feedback to each student. If necessary, edit comments or add your own comments.

Adaptation for eLearning: Create a dropbox assignment or survey in eLearning in which students answer these questions. You can make completion of the feedback a graded assignment (completed/not completed), compile the feedback information for individual students, and distribute this feedback through the course email function or provide it as feedback in the dropbox.

If you ask students to facilitate discussion, gather peer feedback about this skill

After each facilitated discussion, members of a discussion group complete a peer feedback survey for the discussion leader. The peer feedback answers the following questions:

1.      I was prepared for the discussion (true/false)

2.      The discussion leader was organized and prepared (6-point rating scale)

3.      The discussion leader asked good questions (6-point rating scale)

4.      The discussion/activity helped increase my understanding (6-point rating scale)

5.      Describe one thing the discussion leader did well

6.      What might the discussion leader have done differently to make the discussion better?

7.      Other comments (optional)

8.      Overall evaluation of today’s class (6-point rating scale)

Provide feedback several times during the term to enable students to improve their participation and discussion skills over time.

Resources:

Multhaup, K. S. (2008, Spring). Using class discussions to improve oral communication skills. Teaching Tips (APA Division 20 – Adult Development and Aging).

http://www.apadivisions.org/division-20/publications/newsletters/adult-development/2008/04-issue.pdf

This week's Teaching Tip is shared courtesy of and with the permission of the Fordham University Center for Teaching Excellence. The following can be found on their Teaching Tip Archive (along with other great advice) by clicking here.

No matter how tired they (or you) are, students want courses to conclude, not simply to end. After all, a conclusion is key to making sense of the whole. One of our favorite composition textbooks, Writing Analytically, teaches that a good conclusion makes three “moves.” The advice is good for instruction, too.

A good conclusion:

1. comes full circle. It does not so much return to the start as find the beginning reflected in the end. We might revisit the course’s original goals, asking students to reflect and to write briefly about their experiences in light of these goals.

2. pursues implications. Review is essential, but we also want students to see their educations as ever-growing, rather than fixed. Where might this course continue to lead, if we’re willing to follow? We might ask students to connect something from the course to something happening in their lives or in the world at large.

3. identifies limitations. There’s no better way to see the ever-unfinished quality of learning. It might be good to discuss briefly topics we have excluded and to explain why we did so. It’s a good test for our students to name something else we might have covered that they would like to pursue on their own.

Two links: first, the textbook we drew from: http://www.google.com/search?q=9780495910084&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 ; second, a link to UC Berkeley’s terrific advice for last classes: http://teaching.berkeley.edu/2006-2007-new-faculty-teaching-newsletter-13-last-day-class

I have a colleague. He and I give some invited talks about learning-focused course design. We present well together as all of our jokes and punch lines are well-timed with each other. For example, when we present, he makes a point of asking me if my class went well. I respond “yes!” He asks, “How do you know?” and I give a dramatic pause before telling the crowd that “I know the class was successful because the students met the course’s learning goals.”

It sounds so simple but it can be deceivingly so. You see, it would be great if we could answer this question based upon the grades that students earn but often, there are things in the grades that are not related to the learning goals in our syllabi – punishment for turning in assignments late, participation points, extra credit, etc. A lot of us use the final component of our courses – the final exam, the final presentation, a portfolio – as the evidence of student learning in our courses. This is called summative assessment. As you approach the end of your course, what will that summative assessment look like?

This week’s teaching tip provides some information to help you ponder the answer to the question above as well as some tips on how to make your final summative assessment measure what you want it to such that you can gauge your own success. These resources are great:

http://assessment.uconn.edu/docs/resources/AAHE_Principles_of_Good_Practice.pdf - The now-defunct AAHE (American Association for Higher Education) put out multiple lists that gathered research and scholarship of teaching and learning. This document shares 9 principles that support effective assessment.

http://www.park.edu/cetl/quicktips/summative.html - Park University (MO) has a great link on the Center’s page about summative assessment. In particular, look at the links at the bottom of the page for writing different kinds of test questions, considering other kinds of alternative assessments, and portfolios.

http://sloanconsortium.org/jaln/v11n4/course-assessment-practices-and-student-learning-strategies-online-courses - Click on the PDF document available here. Dr. Bridget Arend is a colleague of mine at DU and this is a great study outlining assessment in online courses but the message is still great for courses offered in face-to-face settings. In particular, look at the table at the bottom of page 5 and the top of page 6. This table of the kinds and weights of summative assessment leads to many questions about what summative assessments are measuring.

You don’t need to spend many years as a faculty member to feel like there is not enough time in your courses. Not enough time to teach the content. Not enough time to assess and grade. Not enough time to relate to each student. And so on. Over the years, I have heard lots of faculty talk about ways they ‘save time.’ Having the last half of class be student presentations and group projects are probably the two that I have heard most often. The former requires less instructor prep time. The latter usually leads to less items that are handed in, thus meaning less grading time. Let me say this. Neither of these two approaches are bad approaches by themselves – and they do certainly save time. In fact, they can be downright awesome in terms of student learning but, they require a whole of instructor intentionality and attention to be done well. This week’s teaching tip focuses on group work and how to make sure that it leads to the kind of learning you want it to.

One of the important distinctions in the area of group work is the difference between collaborative learning and cooperative learning.

Collaborative learning is a large term that actually encompasses cooperative learning. Collaborative learning is an educational approach to teaching and learning that involves groups of students working together to solve a problem, complete a task, or create a product. Teamwork can be present, but does not have to be as the solution to the problem, the task, or the product of learning is the end result. I would argue that this is the most common version of group projects. I often call it the divide-and-conquer method.

When done well, this can be great. Smith and MacGregor (1992) present an underlying set of assumptions about the collaborative learning process that we must acknowledge:

1. Learning is an active process whereby students assimilate the information and relate this new knowledge to a framework of prior knowledge;
2. Learning requires a challenge that opens the door for the learner to actively engage his/her peers, and to process and synthesize information rather than simply memorize and regurgitate it;
3. Learners benefit when exposed to diverse viewpoints from people with varied backgrounds;
4. Learning flourishes in a social environment where conversation between learners takes place. During this intellectual gymnastics, the learner creates a framework and meaning to the discourse; and
5. In the collaborative learning environment, the learners are challenged both socially and emotionally as they listen to different perspectives, and are required to articulate and defend their ideas. In so doing, the learners begin to create their own unique conceptual frameworks and not rely solely on an expert's or a text's framework.

Thus, in a collaborative learning setting, learners have the opportunity to converse with peers, present and defend ideas, exchange diverse beliefs, question other conceptual frameworks, and be actively engaged.

The difference for cooperative learning is that the process focuses on working together. Artzt and Newman (1990) in their book, How to Use Cooperative Learning in a Math Class, define cooperative learning like this: Cooperative learning involves a small group of learners, who work together as a team to solve a problem, complete a task, or accomplish a common goal. There are many different cooperative learning techniques; however, all of them have certain elements in common. These elements are the ingredients necessary to insure that when students do work in groups, they work cooperatively. First, the members of a group must perceive that they are part of a team and that they all have a common goal. Second, group members must realize that the problem they are to solve is a group problem and that the success or failure of the group will be shared by all members of the group. Third, to accomplish the group's goal, all students must talk with one another- to engage in discussion of all problems. Finally, it must be clear to all that each member's individual work has a direct effect on the group's success. Teamwork is of utmost importance.

In addition to the assumptions from collaborative learning, Matthews, Cooper, Davidson, and Hawks (1995) present assumptions that we also make with cooperative learning:

1. Developing social and team skills through the give-and-take of consensus building is a fundamental part of a liberal education;
2. Accepting responsibility for learning as an individual and as a member of a group enhances intellectual development; and
3. Articulating one’s ideas in a small-group setting enhances a student’s ability to reflect on their own assumptions and thought processes.

Whether you choose to use collaborative or cooperative learning in your classes, there is a lot of research on them. Be aware of the assumptions and make sure that these assumptions are being met. Be intentional about the set-up and design of group projects and ask if you are ultimately concerned with the product (collaborative work) or the product and the relationships that are built by working together (cooperative learning).

For more information about group work, visit the following resources:
http://www.crlt.umich.edu/publinks/clgt
http://fod.msu.edu/oir/cooperative-collaborative-team-learning

Faculty Focus Report: Effective Group Work Strategies for the College Classroom (contact Ken for a copy of the report).

References:
Artzt, Alice F., and Claire M. Newman. (1990). How to Use Cooperative Learning in the Mathematics Class. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., and Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. California State University Foundation, Long Beach, CA.
Gerlach, J. M. (1994). "Is this collaboration?" In Bosworth, K. and Hamilton, S. J. (Eds.), Collaborative Learning: Underlying Processes and Effective Techniques, New Directions for Teaching and Learning No. 59.
Matthews, R.S., Cooper, J.L., Davidson, N. and Hawkes, P. (1995, July/August). “Building Bridges Between Cooperative and Collaborative Learning.” Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, pp. 35-39.
Millis, B.J. and Cottell, P.G. (1998). Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
Smith, B.L. and MacGregor, J.T. (1992). “What is Collaborative Learning?” In Goodsell, A., Mahelr, M., Tinto, V., Smith, B.L., and MacGregor, J.T. (Eds.), Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education. University Park, PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

In order to retain student attention and facilitate learning, consider integrating a variety of activities into a lecture-based course. Start by finding natural breaks in the content material and break up the lecture into shorter segments. In between the shorter lectures, add activities that require the students to review and apply their new learning and interact with each other. Mix it up by incorporating different activities each week. The change of pace, interaction, and variety can help to enliven the classroom atmosphere and encourage deeper learning for every student. Some activities to consider are listed below.

Skeleton notes – Create a handout with key points of the lecture on the left margin, leaving space for students to fill in notes during lecture. Pair up or group students to compare notes and fill in gaps.  For more details, see: http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/interactive/skeletonnotes.html

Press Conference – Ask students to work in teams to write and organize questions, and then interview the instructor in a simulated press conference.

Clusters – Break reading material into sections and have each individual or group read an assigned section, becoming an “expert” on that section. Each individual or group then teaches the others about the specific material that they learned.

Select the Best Response – Students are presented with a question or scenario and then asked to consider which one of three responses best answers it. This can be used to recall and apply information presented in lecture.

Correct the Error – This can be used in math or lab courses. The instructor creates an intentional error based on important lecture material. Students then work to correct the error.

Support a Statement – The Instructor provides a statement for which students must locate support in lecture notes or textbooks and give data to support the statement.

Re-order Steps – The instructor presents a series of steps in a mixed order and the students are asked to sequence the items correctly.

Short Video Clip – A short, relevant video clip can be useful for introducing a new topic, punctuating the main point, or providing a springboard for class discussion.  For more info on the effective use of video in teaching, see http://citl.indiana.edu/resources/teaching-resources1/using_videos.php

One Minute Paper – Near the end of the class period, ask students to write for one minute on the main 1-2 points of the class. This assignment allows you to gauge student comprehension and gives students an incentive to absorb and comprehend course material.  For use of the minute paper, see: http://citl.indiana.edu/resources/teaching-resources1/minuteCAT.php

Student-created Visuals - Ask students to work in small groups to create visual study aids such as flow charts, graphs, diagrams, artwork, maps, or photography. A variation on this activity could produce student-created study guides prior to each major exam.

For a larger list of teaching techniques, to include using social media (such as Facebook and Twitter) and separated by clss type, see this list written by my colleague Kevin Yee at the Unievrsity of Central Florida: http://www.ivc.edu/academics/officeCTEWD/tpp/Documents/Ineractive%20Teaching%20Ideas.pdf

Or, if interested in different ways to encourage discussion, see: http://citl.indiana.edu/files/pdf/Discussion_Techniques_2010.pdf

Teaching Tip shared courtesy of Debi Griffin and Belinda Richardson of Bellarmine University.

Additional references:

Angelo, T. A., and Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

If you have never thought about the research of how students study, you should!  Not only is it entirely interesting and likely different from how you think students study, but it can be extremely informative for what you, as the teacher, can help students improve their learning.  There are many studies on how prompting students’ thinking prior to completing coursework improves their learning.  This week’s teaching tip comes directly from the research and speaks to direct instruction as well as online discussions.  And it is easily implementable!  By asking only these four questions (with the right timing, of course), you can improve students’ quiz scores and critical thinking scores:

• “Identify one important concept, research finding, theory, or idea … that you learned while completing this activity.” (analysis)
• “Why do you believe that this concept, research finding, theory, or idea … is important?” (reflection)
• “Apply what you have learned from this activity to some aspect of your life.” (relation)
• “What question(s) has the activity raised for you? What are you still wondering about?” [You might need to prohibit the answer “nothing”.] (question)

For details on how this works, you can quickly read the summary in this Faculty Focus article: http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/prompts-that-get-students-to-analyze-reflect-relate-and-question/?utm_source=cheetah&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2013.08.28%20Faculty%20Focus%20Update

Or, you can see the original research:

Dietz-Uhler, B. and Lanter, J. R. (2009). Using the four-questions technique to enhance learning. Teaching of Psychology, 36 (1), 38-41. (available in full text through our library: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=831f2c59-e6e7-4aaf-814d-9efcd3db0781%40sessionmgr115&vid=4&hid=128)

Alexander, M. E., Commander, N., Greenberg, D., and Ward, T. (2010) Using the four-questions technique to enhance critical thinking in online discussions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6 (2), 409-415. (available through our library at: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/alexander_0610.pdf)

• The MERLOT ELIXR Initiative offers a digital case story repository that hosts more than 70 discipline-specific multimedia stories. MERLOT is an acronym for Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching. Digital stories for faculty development can provide real-life experiences of exemplary teaching strategies and the process of implementing them. These digital case stories can be used freely in faculty development programs and also accessed by individual instructors. Cal State University professors created this wonderful video about the first day of class: http://elixr.merlot.org/case-stories/course-preparation--design/first-day-of-class/goals-for-first-day-of-class7
• Carnegie Mellon University has a great list of questions and pointers ranging from how to effectively introduce yourself to the class to collecting a baseline of your students' prior knowledge and expectations: http://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/teach/firstday.html
• Finally, my counterpart at the University of New Mexico, Dr. Gary Smith, wrote this article a few years ago titled, "First Day Questions for the Learning-Centered Classroom." The questions he asks help create student buy in. This short essay is a great resource to drive thinking about what our courses are really about: http://www.ntlf.com/issues/v17n5/v17n5.pdf.

Many faculty teach in an environment different from their own educational background, and they already face or will begin to face increasing numbers of diverse students.  Diverse students turn our classes into multicultural environments that can enrich student and faculty experiences. Faculty must be aware of themselves and their students when planning and teaching their courses and communicating with students.

A variety of learning and testing opportunities, a non-competitive grading system based on learning objectives (See last week’s tip), and genuine concern for individual students support student achievement.  Below, we continue the theme from last week with a few concrete suggestions for the classroom from Mary Allen, a professor of Psychology and Director of the Teaching and Learning Center at Cal State Bakersfield.

Avoid assumptions. Faculty assumptions about life experiences may inadvertently exclude some students from the desired impact of an example, and may alienate students whose values and expectations differ from their own. International students are about 3 percent of students in American colleges, and other students may be first-generation Americans; they may have quite different reactions to your references to historical events, literary allusions, or your implied assumptions about life experiences. A student recently told me about his childhood in Mexico, and how every day he carried a can to the central well to bring water to his household. An example of rewarding a child by buying a new movie or videogame may miss the mark with this student.

Slow down. Give students time to think during class discussions. Although native-English-speaking extroverts may participate immediately when you stimulate a discussion, other students may need time to process your question, to collect their thoughts, and to phrase them for presentation to the class. Consider asking students to write responses before the discussion begins, and consider a "think-pair-share" strategy in which students share responses within dyads before the whole-class discussion. Although it takes a few more minutes, all students should be able to contribute to the discussion. "Taking the stage" and challenging authority may violate cultural norms for some students, and special sensitivity, encouragement, and shaping of such behaviors may be necessary.

Allow class time for group projects. Commuting and working students and students with family obligations may have difficulty working on group projects outside of class, especially if their schedules differ from others in their group. Give them the opportunity to participate during class.

Diversify references. Use a variety of ethnic names (e.g., Imelda, LaKeisha, Shoreh, Tran, Rafael, Buford, Ahmed, Jin) in exam questions and examples. For example, I include reference to Dr. Perez as well as to Dr. Jones in exam questions, and I deliberately balance names with roles, so that sometimes the professional has a female name and sometimes the professional has a male name. Students should see opportunities for people like themselves.

Consider using technology. Web links can be used to give students options and to expose them to materials not in traditional academic libraries, including international and non-English materials, and email communication allows students to thoughtfully compose questions and receive personalized attention. Nontraditional students who are quiet in traditional classrooms and students who require time to frame statements in English may open up when allowed to communicate electronically, and give those with scheduling problems access to your wisdom.

Next week, look for suggestions to improve communication with all students. 

Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39, 3-7.

Chism, N. V. M. (1999). Taking student social diversity into account. In W. J. McKeachie, Teaching
tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (10th ed., pp. 218-234).
New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Cooper, J., & Robinson, P. (1998). Small-group instruction in science, mathematics, engineering
and technology (SMET) disciplines: A status report and an agenda for the future. Available at
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/CL/resource/ smallgrp.htm.

Davis, B. G. (1993). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McKeachie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university
teachers (10th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Walvood, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (1998). Effective grading. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.