Category: Course Design

Cliff Rouder, Assistant Director, CAT

Nota Bene: This is a true classroom experience I had during my undergraduate student days.  Please fasten your seatbelts as we prepare for take-off.  

Picture it: a 900-seat auditorium at a major research university. My first day of introductory physics. My friends and I entered the massive lecture hall and settled in. Suddenly, we heard (and felt) a very loud rumbling noise coming from stage left. In a flash, we caught a glimpse of a man seated on what looked like a rocket-shaped go-cart racing across the stage. Applause, and then a collective sigh of relief. Surely this was not the “weed out” course we were warned about. Surely this was a professor who had thought about how to make this course meaningful and motivating. Surely we were going to get lots of practice and support. Well, turns out we were surely wrong.  

Things went from awesome to “uh oh” faster than that rocket. After our instructor disembarked, he put 900 copies of a one-page syllabus on a table and told us we could pick it up at the end of the class if we thought we could pass the course after that first lecture. He then walked over to three massive blackboards and furiously wrote equations nonstop for the next 50 minutes. We, too, were furiously copying (and mis-copying) what he was writing, while not understanding a thing. We had no clue how the homework problems related to what he wrote on those blackboards, and he never helped us connect them. If you’re still wondering what the rocket entrance had to do with the course, he never told us, at least not before my friends and I got our first exams back and made the unilateral decision to drop the course. The experience was enough to cause some of my friends to switch majors. “Houston, we have a problem.”

Although there are multiple factors involved in a student’s decision to drop a STEM major, the good news is that what we do in our classrooms has the potential to positively impact retention directly, or on potential mediators of retention like reduced failure rate, improved exam scores, and self-efficacy. We now know a lot more about how learning works in the brain and the teaching strategies that can promote deep and lasting learning (you know, the kind that’s more than just memorizing information the night before an exam and forgetting it the day after). And the best news of all is that incorporating some of these strategies into your courses is pretty doable.

Let’s Exchange EDvice!

How could “Professor Rocket” have…

• used his rocket entrance as a “hook” to find out, relative to his course content, what students already knew; what misconceptions they had brought with them; and what interests and prior experiences they had?  Why would doing this be valuable?  What are some less grandiose “hooks” you might use in your courses?
   

• challenged his students in a more supportive way?  What might he have said, or what might he have written in his syllabus to create an environment where students felt included and supported while being challenged?  What might you do in your courses to create this environment?
   
• engaged us in the learning process even though we were in an auditorium?  Why is this important to do?  What in-class opportunities do you give your students to work with course concepts and content?

Operators are standing by, so let’s hear from you! After all, who wouldn’t want to “rocket” a course to greatness?!

Pete Watkins, Associate Director, TLC

As the parent of two pre-teens, I find myself constantly having to pull my children away from their video games. I watch commuters on the train engrossed in video games on their phones and tablets. From casual games such as Candy Crush, to complex games such as Civilization, these games seem to have a hold on people. So as a teacher, it got me thinking  “What is it about video games that make them so engaging, even addictive?” and “What can teachers learn from game designers about how to increase engagement among learners?”

Here are three characteristics of video games that have direct implications for teaching:

1. Video games are active.  

Most people play, not watch, video games. Occasionally, one of my children will watch another child play, and some people will even pay to watch highly skilled gamers compete. But overwhelmingly, people play video games. So the lesson for teachers is: Make your classes interactive. Have students do something! Of course, teachers will use some lectures and demonstration to impart foundational knowledge, but active learning will increase engagement and deepen learning.

2. Video games adjust to the skill level of the player, getting progressively more
    difficult as the player gets better.  

This is key to helping the learner sustain engagement. Sherman and Csikszentmihalyi (2008) state: “Optimally engaging activities were therefore neither trivially simple nor impossibly hard; rather, the appropriate match between challenge and skill led to higher quality learning experiences in terms of perceived engagement, intrinsic motivation, mood, and self-esteem.” Both gamers and students will disengage if the task before them is too easy or too hard. So adjust your lessons to the level of your learners and stay in what Vygotsky called the ‘zone of proximal development‘. This may mean having bonus or challenge questions, or readings for students who are more advanced as well as extra support or scaffolding for beginning learners.  

3. Video games give the player frequent, immediate feedback which helps them
    improve.  

Anyone who plays video games knows that games give you frequent feedback about your performance through losing lives, unlocking levels etc. Similarly, as teachers, we can use frequent, low stakes formative assessments to gauge students’ progress, give them corrective feedback and keep students motivated and engaged.  

For more ideas about how to engage modern learners, the Teaching and Learning Center invites you to attend the 14th Annual Faculty Conference on Teaching Excellence to be held at Temple University on January 22, 2016. This event will feature plenary speaker Dr. Christy Price, the 2012 Carnegie US Professor of the Year, delivering an address titled “Why don’t my students think I’m groovy? Engaging the modern learner”.

Johanna Inman, Assistant Director, TLC

This semester the TLC and the General Education Program are co-sponsoring a faculty Teaching Circle on the topic of Integrative Learning. This teaching circle is an opportunity for faculty who teach General Education courses to come together and discuss the significance of GenEd, how to motivate students in these courses, and how to help students connect learning in these courses to courses in their majors, their careers, and their personal lives. Johanna Inman is an Assistant Director at the TLC and co-facilitates the Integrative Learning Teaching Circle.– – – – –

Anyone who has taught a general education course at Temple University, or at any university, is familiar with the “just get through it” attitude students often arrive with on the first day of class. Many students do not value these courses and as a result, see them as a fairly low priority.

Yet, GenEd equips students with the information literacy, communication and critical thinking skills they will need for university-level work. Most of us teaching these courses also recognize the long-term impact that liberal education can have on our students’ professional and personal lives. In a recent survey conducted on behalf of AAC&U, an overwhelming majority of employers surveyed said they seek to hire graduates with the abilities to innovate, think critically, communicate clearly, solve complex problems, and draw on a broad range of knowledge—all learning goals commonly found in general education courses.

AAC&U and higher education leaders across the nation are working hard to change students’ perception of general education, while improving curriculum to make certain it actually helps students improve skills they need to be successful. Curricula nationally are undergoing re-evaluation in order to intentionally build in integrative projects, assignments, and learning experiences. This approach to learning helps students “connect, reflect, and apply learning so that the whole becomes more than the sum of the parts.”

While higher education leaders work towards improving integrative learning across the curriculum, faculty play an instrumental role in helping students value learning in all courses, make meaningful connections between them, and develop a holistic view of their learning experience throughout their entire academic career.

Strategies you can use to help students value and make meaningful connections across all learning experiences.

1. Teach transparently.

As Linda Nilson points out in her book Creating Self-Regulated Learners, students see value in assignments when “they believe it will help them receive a good grade in the course, obtain a job, achieve success in a career, or learn about something important to them.” On the contrary, they will not work hard on tasks they believe to be meaningless busywork.

What does your course promise to students? What will they learn? How will it help them be better learners, professionals, and citizens? First, make sure you know the answers to these questions, and then tell them to your students!

For every assignment, help students clearly understand the task, purpose and criteria. Students are more motivated when they know what is expected of them and there is a clear pathway to improvement. However, they cannot know these things unless we explicitly tell them.

2. Model integrative learning.

Modeling—thinking, demonstrating, or problem solving out loud in front of students—is one of the most simple, yet effective, teaching techniques. It has been proven to improve students’ metacognition and critical thinking skills and it can be an effective strategy to help students make connections among general education courses, courses within their major, and their personal experience.

Heard something in the news that relates to a course discussion? Is there a link between a lecture topic and your current research? Did you have an interesting conversation about a course reading with a colleague in another department? Tell your students! Explain the connections. When students hear faculty making these connections, they are more likely to do so themselves.

3. Provide opportunities for reflection.

Too often students graduate from college having learned a great deal—but not necessarily realizing what they’ve learned or knowing its value. Students need time and space to consider what they’ve learned, how they’ve learned it, and how they’ve grown as a result.

Provide students the opportunity to reflect on their learning by assigning learning journals, reflective essays, or a learning portfolio. Worried about the extra grading? Create opportunities for students to reflect on their learning in class with ungraded one-minute papers or ask students to submit assignments with reflective annotations or a reflective memo.

4. Reward integrative learning.

If making connections between courses or between course content and students’ personal experience is something you value, it should be included in your grading criteria. When a student mentions a link between your course content and something they learned previously—celebrate it. When students make meaningful connections, point them out and make a big deal about it. Ultimately, the goal of integrative learning is to help students realize that learning happens over time, inside of the classroom and out—to understand learning as holistic, constant, and lifelong.

Let’s Exchange Edvice

What strategies have you used to help students make meaningful connections across courses? What strategies have you used to help students make meaningful connections between learning in your course and their personal experience?

This post highlights key takeaways from Chapter 5 of How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, by Susan A. Ambrose, Michael W. Bridges, Michele DiPietro, Marsha C. Lovett, and Marie K. Norman. This book has become an essential resource for TLC programs and initiatives, so much that we have invited Drs. DiPietro and Lovett to keynote at our annual conference on January 17, 2014! See below for details.– – – – –

Clear expectations. Hours of grading. Ample feedback. No improvement.

The fifth chapter of How Learning Works, on practice and feedback, starts with testimonials on student performance that most instructors will find all too familiar. The first example tells of a professor who spent hours grading assignments and offering substantial comments for improvement. Yet his students’ subsequent efforts on different assignments were just as disappointing. What went wrong?

Drawing on our summary of best practices in course design, this situation suggests a misalignment between learning activities, assessments, and course goals. Here, students were not given the opportunity to incorporate the professor’s feedback into further practice activities. Perhaps they would have applied new understandings, but they weren’t given the chance to try again with the specific task. Furthermore, the sequence of assignments was an issue; the professor was assessing different skills with each assignment, instead of giving students additional opportunities to demonstrate and master the targeted skills.

In a well-designed course, each learning goal is matched with the appropriate quality and quantity of activities and assessments. Scenarios like the one above are all too common. This begs the question: How can we better approach these processes of practice, assessment, grading, and feedback to improve student learning?

Key Considerations from the Book

The authors of How Learning Works proclaim that students will miss crucial learning opportunities if the professor’s practice and feedback activities do not “work smarter.” It is “smart” to offer multiple opportunities for practice and to give feedback that is clear and specific. Students need sufficient practice in advance of assessments, wherein their knowledge and abilities are measured.

The more opportunities students have to practice, the more chances the instructor has to observe their performance, evaluate their progress, and provide targeted feedback, which students can then incorporate to improve their subsequent performances. This mix of practice and feedback will guide students toward eventual achievement of the course learning goals.

The Cycle of Practice and Feedback

Similarly to Fink’s work on course design, the authors suggest that all practice and feedback elements center around designated learning goals. This is explained as a cycle (pictured below) wherein “practice produces observed performance that, in turn, allows for targeted feedback, and then the feedback guides further practice. This cycle is embedded within the context of learning goals that ideally influence each aspect of the cycle” (How Learning Works pp. 126-127).

Practical Implications

The authors provide some guiding principles for directing this cycle effectively: 1) Focus students’ efforts “on a specific goal or criterion.” 2) Set standards at a “reasonable and productive level of challenge.” 3) Provide multiple opportunities for practice, both in and out of class. The research reiterates that “time on task” is essential. Both quality and quantity matter.

The authors’ recommendations for “strategies that address the need for goal-directed practice” include:

• “Conduct a prior knowledge assessment to target an appropriate challenge level” (p. 145)
• “Be more explicit about your goals in your course materials” (p. 145)
• “Use a rubric to specify and communicate performance criteria” (p. 146)
• “Give examples or models of target performance” (p. 147)

Professors should also maintain open and specific communication about students’ progress and improvement throughout the course. It is not helpful to comment on every error in an assessment; prioritize your feedback to focus on where specific learning goals are (or are not) met. It is best to give feedback quickly and frequently, the authors note. They recommend a number of ways to achieve effective feedback, such as:

• “Look for patterns of errors in student work” (p. 148)
• “Balance [student] strengths and weaknesses in your feedback” (p. 149)
• “Provide feedback at the group level” to communicate common errors (p. 150)
• “Require students to specify how they used feedback in subsequent work” (p. 151-152)

The authors note that as students internalize the lessons learned from regular practice opportunities and from targeted feedback, they can become independent, self-regulated learners. According to the authors, the ideal goal of these approaches is for students to actively engage in and direct their own learning. Ultimately, these goal-driven practice and feedback opportunities are examples of how students and teachers can work “smarter,” not harder.

Let’s Exchange EDvice…

What practice opportunities do you give your students in order to prepare them to complete an assignment or exam? What EDvice do you have for colleagues who want students to learn from and use their feedback?

– – –

This post was co-written by our communications extern, Alexa Mantell, and Assistant Director Carl S. Moore.

This blog will only allow those with a Temple University account to comment directly on the blog. If you do not have a Temple University account, we would still like to hear from you.  

Course design is to teaching and learning what sheet music is to performing a symphony. Both require careful composition, indeed, but to deliver the best outcome, the most satisfying result, all parts must work together harmoniously. A well integrated course provides structure and is characterized by a reciprocal alignment among the essential course components: goals, assessments, and teaching and learning activities.

At the Teaching and Learning Center (TLC), Dr. Dee Fink’s work (concisely represented in A Self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning) provides the foundation for many of our programs and initiatives. We always design our own programs with his model of integrated course design in mind, and we encourage colleagues to do the same. Lessons on integrated course design are a key component in our most robust faculty development programs, such as the annual summer Provost’s Teaching Academy and the Teaching in Higher Education Certificate program.

The Model

Fink’s model (pictured below) challenges educators to not only articulate intended course goals but to ensure that assignments, activities, and assessments all lead to the achievement of those goals. He also highlights the presence of situational factors, which are contextual issues in any given course environment that could affect the learning. These could include but are not limited to: the age of students, their prior knowledge of the subject matter, and the size of the room.

As illustrated in the diagram, Fink stresses that all components of a course are interdependent and impacted by situational factors. A course designed with Fink’s framework in mind results in a more student-centered and intentional pedagogy.

Fundamental Features

The core course components discussed in Fink’s work are: goals, activities, and assessments, defined below:

• Goals are the final learning results of a semester-long experience. Teachers should ask themselves: “What will students learn or be able to do once they complete my course?” A Primer on Writing Effective Learning-Centered Course Goals offers excellent guidance for articulating clear, measurable goals.
• Activities are the teaching strategies and learning experiences that comprise the day-to-day of the course. In the best courses, each element is used to prepare students to successfully complete the assessments. What do the students need to read, hear, see, practice, do if they are to meet the goals measured by the assessments? Fink recommends that activities directly link to the overarching course goal(s) and stimulate active learning. Examples of classroom activities that Fink provides include debates, simulations, guided discussion, small group problem solving, and case studies.
• Assessments give students the opportunity to demonstrate where they are in relation to achieving the course learning goals, and you an opportunity to evaluate the students’ performance and give feedback.

The goals must be determined first; once they have been articulated an educator can begin the work of thoughtfully integrating each component with the others. So, as an example, if a professor’s course goal is for students to be able to evaluate the quality of an argument, an aligned teaching activity might be for students to read a successfully argued article, then hear a brief lecture where the teacher identifies the components of the good argument such as a clear thesis and evidence. A professor might then ask students to read a sample article and engage in a think-pair-share learning activity, using a rubric to evaluate those same components together. An aligned learning activity might look very similar to the assessment; after all, it is not fair to ask students to demonstrate mastery without having had some practice first. In this scenario, students might be asked to put their evaluations of a sample article’s argument into writing.

Payoff Potential

Integrated course design requires that instructors are intentional about how each individual component is significant to the final outcome. This method fosters a more coordinated experience, Fink writes, so that at any given moment in the semester, students can understand the importance of assignments and activities as well as which goal(s) they are working toward.

If intentional about design, educators can maximize the potential for a course that is stable in its structure, steady in its pacing, purposeful in its direction, and meaningful in its instruction. Integrated course design, Fink posits, enables students to better retain knowledge and extend their involvement in the material beyond a single course. Fink encourages each teacher to “increase [his or her] power and effectiveness as someone responsible for the quality of other peoples’ learning experience” (original emphasis).

Let’s Exchange EDvice…

As you reflect on courses you have taught or taken, can you share an instance where the key components were not fully aligned? or were? How do you plan to better align the goals, activities, and assessments in your course?

– – –

This post was co-written by our communications extern, Alexa Mantell, and Assistant Director Carl S. Moore, and edited by Alexa and Pamela Barnett, Associate Vice Provost and Director.