SMALL GROUPS, LARGE CLASS SERIES (PART V)

Since I last updated this series (see Part IV), a lot has happened. The teams have completed and presented their posters, they have given one another feedback, and grading has been completed for another year. So how did things turn out?

In general, the posters were pretty good, and students seemed to be fair in both the peer reviews of fellow group members, as well as in their assessments of the posters created by other groups. Students for the most part provided both positive and critical feedback (thanks, in part, to the prompts on peer evaluation rubrics asking them to do so). There were some students who didn't pull their weight, and the scores and comments they received reflected this. 

So what were the surprises? The two highest scoring posters (based both on my grading and the reviews from their peers) were from the two groups I had been most worried about. The first was the group who were placed together because none of them had submitted their topic preferences (see Part I in the series). I had been concerned that this was a red flag indicating that these may be students who were less committed to the class, and unlikely to show up or contribute. This turned out to be true for some members of this group, but the others pulled together and were determined to create a high quality project, despite their other group members (or the fact that I had, from their perspective, doomed them to failure). Several of these students demonstrated strong leadership skills, and their poster turned out wonderfully.

The other group that surprised me was a group that had been placed together based on a common interest in moral development, broadly speaking. Their first task was to decide what in particular they would focus on. I have to say I was quite shocked when they told me that they had chosen to investigate the development of serial killers. I had my doubts (as did another group member, who I allowed to switch groups), but ultimately decided to allow them to pursue this topic. And I am so glad that I did! Their poster was thoughtfully researched, had more connections to course material than some on topics I had actually taught and tested on, and was very professional. It just goes to show what can happen when you allow students to pursue their own interest, no matter how odd they may seem to be on the surface!

One other issue I encountered that I hadn't expected, and wasn't sure what to do with, was that one of the posters contained sections that were clearly plagiarized. It seemed obvious to me that this was a group who had worked individually and then slapped it all together, rather than truly collaborating. So this was likely the handiwork of only one student. Yet, this was a group project, and thus in some senses this was the responsibility of the team as a whole. Ultimately, rather than asking the team to identify the student who had contributed the plagiarized sections, I chose to severely dock the team (but chose not to fail them) and explain to them my reasoning. None of them has yet responded, so although they may not be happy with my decision, they don't seem to feel that it is one that deserves to be challenged.

In all, this was a great semester, and having the poster session on the last day of class allowed all of the students to show off their hard work and learn from the projects presented by their classmates. Certainly I would do some things differently next time around, but I can assure you that this will not be the last time I incorporate group work into my large classes.

Ah, the end of another semester. No more classrooms, no more books! (At least until next week!)

Teaching and Learning Online Series - Part 5

Provide for interaction using synchronous and asynchronous activities

By Dr. Vanae E. Morris

Adult learners have a distinct orientation to learning (e.g. life or task centered), and they approach learning as problem solving. Adult learners also need motivation to learn.  Providing asynchronous activities in an online learning environment can help many adult learners learn best in their preferred style of learning and this type of learning environment can also encourage problem solving and critical thinking.  However, as Knowles (2011) discovered and added a sixth assumption to the theory of andragogy, adults need encouragement and need to be motivated to learn. Having a few synchronous activities in an online learning environment could encourage that motivation needed. Think of these synchronous activities as a form of cheerleading because all of the class would be together at the same time discussing, asking questions, and encouraging each other. 

I have taught in an asynchronous learning environment for many years with minimal synchronous activities being a part of that learning environment. However, as I have started teaching in a new online learning management system with students who are more accustomed to face-to-face classroom environments, I have found myself researching different ways that synchronous activities could be added to my online learning environment that would encourage more interaction between myself and the learners, and learner to learner. 

What I do know is that I need to provide activities that provide for three types of interaction, learner to content, learner to instructor, and learner to learner (Moore, 1989).  Of the three, the easiest for an online instructor to provide is generally the learner to content. The learner to content interaction has roots back to “independent study” courses where the learner did, for the most part, only interact with the content with very little interaction with the instructor or other learners.  In the online learning environments of today’s classrooms, this type of interaction is important but in order to be considered an effective online learning environment, providing the other types of interaction becomes critical to the learning process of the online learner. 

What does this type of interaction “look” like in the current online learning environment?  According to Ko (2005) the interaction between instructor and learner includes “being in the classroom on a regular and frequent basis−through announcements, discussion boards, and emails to the whole class” (slide 5). Ko also suggests that the instructor provide a variety of assignments that encourage this type of interaction as well as those that provide for learner to learner interaction such as peer reviews, discussion threads (facilitated not dominated by the instructor), and learning community interactions and assignments. 

Boettcher and Conrad (2010) recognize the importance of synchronous activities just due to the nature of the online course management systems that are available for instructors and learners to interact such as “virtual live classrooms, spontaneous collaboration tools, and an almost infinite number of Web tools and smartphones that support synchronous chat, video messaging and more” (p. 42). However, there is an important reason why students take online courses (and instructors teach online courses)  and that is generally due to the asynchronous aspect of the online learning environment. Providing for both types of learning, synchronous and asynchronous, gives the learner the best of both worlds (f2f and online) because “Sometimes, there is nothing better than a real-time interactive brainstorming and sharing discussion; at other times, the requirement to think, plan, write, and reflect is what makes learning most effective for an individual” (Boettcher & Conrad, 2010, p. 42). 

References

Boettcher, J.V. & Conrad, R. (2010). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (7^th ed.). New York: Elsevier.

Ko, S. (2005). Student-centered online teaching: Best practices. Retrieved from http://www.powershow.com

Moore, M.G. (1989). Editorial: Three Types of Interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education (3)2.

(Em)Power in the Classroom Series (Part 5)

by Rai Farrelly

Welcome back from the dark side! That's what I'll say when I greet instructors and faculty members who - at some point - fell down the slippery slope of hardcore assessment only to one glorious day question their practices and the mismatch between their assessments and learning objectives - leading them to reflect, read, question and then return to the brighter side of the assessment paradigm.

What exactly shapes the dark and bright sides of this paradigm, you might ask. Well, traditional approaches to assessment not only place far too much emphasis on the grade, they also extract the students from the entire process. Assessment essentially becomes something that happens to the students rather than something with which they engage. Much like the traditional lecture, which has been in place for decades, evaluation practices have been passed down, inherited and accepted as the 'way it should be done.'

Consider this article about how students learn, which states that the word lecture comes from the Latin word meaning 'to read'. There was a great need to lecture back when books weren't readily published. Now, we need not read (talk) to them about our content areas - we can let them read and explore outside of class and then co-construct knowledge around the content, dive in through discussions and activities in class. We'll be on hand to support, facilitate and inspire!

Now let's think about assessment ... and we'll do so through a little anecdote. I recently consulted with a graduate student who is about to teach her own class for the first time. She's had experiences as a teaching assistant, so she's led the occasional lesson and graded many a paper. Now she gets to design her own course and is excited about choosing materials, deciding which topics to include and developing a sense of how to explore the content with her students. 

During our consultation, I asked her what assessments she has in place for the course. Her response: "Two exams and three quizzes." [Insert dramatic pause] Or is it only me that needs the dramatic pause because I know what course she's teaching ... see if you can guess based on her response to my follow-up question. "So, let's take a step back. What are the learning outcomes you have set for this course? What is it that you want them to be able to do by the end of this course?" She lists a few simple, measurable outcomes: 1) to track the life of a seed in the ground until it comes fully into being and produces food; 2) to articulate the policies that impact how, when and where food is grown, and; 3) to describe the relationship of food cultivation to the larger web of life. (I'm kind of paraphrasing, but you get the idea.) It's a class on organic gardening and I struggled to understand the link between her objectives and her assessments. When asked why those would be her measures, she replied: "Because that's how it's always been done."

What alternatives could we implement in this class? I'm sure you can suggest many, but here are a few options I offered: have students keep a journal of their gardens' successes and failures (include relevant content, provide a rubric, set the bar high for quality work), develop group projects that tackle policies relevant to organic gardening in legislature, have students develop strategic plans for local nonprofit community gardens, stage end of semester debates around 'hot topics', have students write a paper on the challenges they faced when developing their compost, etc.

Knowing that this course meets a science requirement for all undergrads, there is the feeling that the assessments should be more rigorous. That's fine. Just create clear, high standards criteria for each assignment. Require students to incorporate key terms, evidence-based argumentation, organizational thinking, problem-solving skills, etc. Alternative assessment does not by its nature imply 'easy assessment'.

When we reconsider how we assess and make sure that our assessments actually measure the learning outcomes we have set forth for our students, we find a balance in our instruction that is often missing when class sessions are hands on and assessments are multiple choice (for example).

With relation to sharing the power (and thereby reducing anxiety) there are many ways to involve students in the assessment process. Barbara Gross Davis (2009) has a wealth of great ideas in her text Tools for Teaching (see Unit VIII - Testing and Grading). She suggests alternative assessments and tweaks on the old favorites. For example, for those courses that just have to implement exams, why not leave space for students to justify their multiple choice answers. How about letting students buy additional information on certain questions (with points, not money - i.e., they lose 3 points of total available, but they get the formula to calculate degrees of freedom). Allow them to bring crib sheets, provide an extra credit question or even let them write one final question in on a blank and answer it for points. Give practice exams and review sessions and maybe even let them redo an exam. Give them a chance to show what they know!

The reality is that if we are married to grades and students are weighed down by the pressure and anxiety about grades, we live on the dark side where students tend to cheat more, they equate their ability with their grades, and they become 'grade grubbers' - begging us at key stages in the semester for more points (Weimer, 2002).

We'll continue to explore assessment next time as I review my students' final portfolio and consider the impact on them of being assessed in this way. I'll also share with you my non-traditional approach to grading - including the negotiation part. 

 

Gross-Davis, B. (2009). Tools for Teaching – 2^nd Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Weimer, M. (2002) Learner Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. San Francisco; Jossey-Bass.