Activities for
Learner-Centered
Teaching
Effective Teaching and Learning Department
1050 West Bristol Rd.
Flint, MI 48507
© 2009 Baker College
Contact
Information
Effective Teaching and Learning Department
Website:
Overview
of Packet Contents
Background
Information
2…………………... Learner-Centered
Teaching: Becoming a Lifelong Learner
3…………………... Using Active Learning
Strategies in Learner-Centered Teaching
4…………………... Critical Thinking
Takes Students Deeper in Their Learning
5…………………... The Importance of
Reflection in Learning
6…………………... Asking Better
Questions Improves Learning
6…………………...Generic Question Stems
7…………………... Suggestions for Using
Learning Activities
8…………………...
Models for Evaluating Student Performance in Learning Activities
9…………………...
Index of Learning Activities Grouped by Learning Strategy
10…………………. Index
of Learning Activities (Alphabetically)
11-32…………… Activities
Appendices
33………………… Appendix A – Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy of Critical Thinking
34………………… Appendix B – Background
on Using Problem-Based Learning Activities
35………………… Appendix C –
Summary of Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs)
39………………… Appendix D –
Class Session / Unit Design Template
40-43…………… References and Additional Resources
Learner-Centered
Teaching: Becoming a Lifelong Learner
A paradigm shift is
occurring in education: The shift from
the teacher being the “center of the classroom” to a primary focus on whether or not the student is learning. One article refers to the teacher’s role as changing
from being the “sage on the stage, to the guide on the side.” (King,
1993) In learner-centered teaching, the responsibilities of both the teacher and the learner change,
with the ultimate goal of the student becoming a “lifelong learner.” Note: This paradigm shift will require change for
both the students (who are used to being told everything) and the teachers
(who are used to telling students what they need to know).
Learner-centered teaching
focuses attention squarely on learning:
what the student is learning,
how the student is learning, the conditions under which the student
is learning, whether the student is applying
the learning, and how current learning positions the student for future learning.
·
When teaching is
learner-centered, the action focuses on what the students (not the teachers)
are doing….This learner-centered orientation accepts, cultivates, and builds on
the ultimate responsibility that students have for their own learning.
·
When teaching is
learner-centered, content is used,
not covered.
·
Course content /
curriculum is not the end; it is the means to the end.
·
Don’t assume that because teachers
have taught, that students have learned.
·
This is not only about how
teachers need to become learner-centered teachers, but also teaching the
students to become learner-centered learners.
The
paradigm shift to learner-centered teaching can be summed up with the following
seven principles, as discussed in Learner-Centered
Teaching by Maryellen Weimer:
Principle 1: Teachers Do
Learning Tasks Less
Learners
do more of:
·
Organizing the content
·
Generating the examples
·
Asking the questions
·
Answering the questions
·
Summarizing the discussion
·
Solving problems
·
Constructing diagrams
Principle 2: Teachers Do
Less Telling; Students Do More Discovering
This
is “messier,” in that classrooms may be “louder,” it may take longer for
students to “get” concepts, and the teacher learns new teaching methods. Students progressively take more
responsibility for their learning through discovering, and “uncovering” what
they need to know.
Principle 3: Teachers Do
More Design Work (of activities and learning experiences)
Effective
assignments and activities, which are designed to help students:
·
Increase learning skills (learning “how to”
learn)
·
Motivate student involvement and
participation
·
Discover work that is related to the discipline/real
world
·
Develop content knowledge, learning skills,
and awareness
Principle 4: Faculty Do
More Modeling
Demonstrate
for students how an expert approaches a learning task, and how you problem
solve.
Principle 5: Faculty Do
More to Get Students Learning from and with Each Other
Use
collaborative activities and cooperative groups for learning.
Principle 6: Faculty Work
to Create Climates for Learning
Create
learning environments conducive to students taking responsibility for their own
learning.
Principle 7: Faculty Do
More with Feedback
Feedback
is not just about grades, but also informal and helps students learn from
mistakes.
(Weimer, 2002)
Using
Active Learning
Strategies in Learner-Centered Teaching
So, if
lecture is not the primary instructional method, what is? Learner-centered
teaching utilizes “active learning strategies,” often referred to as
“experiential learning.” Learners are
regularly presented with tasks, whether it be problems to solve, opportunities
to discuss, hands-on projects, simulations, etc. IMPORTANT: Don’t do an activity “just to do” an
activity. It should be connected in
some way to the learning that you want to occur, whether it’s specific to the
Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) or critical thinking skills. Always tie it back to the learning.
Kolb’s
Model of Experiential Learning provides one of the foundations for this model
of how learning occurs in the classroom. Note
that it is an ongoing cycle of learning (not only for the student, but also for
the teacher!):
Kolb’s
Model of Experiential Learning (Kolb, 1984)
This
model of learning follows these steps:
- Action / Activity- The learner performs some type of
activity related to the lesson or subject.
- Reflection- The learner reflects about what they
did and what happened as a result of their activity. This can be in one of
several forms: free writing, journaling, or small or large group
discussions.
- Knowledge/theory- The learner uses the results of the
reflection to develop knowledge and theories, which helps further the
learning process because the learner is conceptualizing their own
theories, not just accepting the theory of the instructor.
- Planning-
Based on the learner’s theories, they plan what to do next and anticipate
the results of further activity. This process moves the learner into the
higher levels of thinking than merely recall/recite facts or information.
Critical Thinking Takes
Students Deeper in Their Learning
Employers
are looking for graduates who can problem-solve, know how to work in teams, are
flexible, have strong interpersonal skills, and who can use “higher level
thinking.” We want students to move from
“surface-level” learning to “deep learning,” which is a facet of being a
lifelong learner. Learner-centered
teaching focuses on developing critical thinking skills, by intentionally
challenging the students to do more than just recall facts and figures. When was the last time your boss asked you to
complete a multiple-choice task?
The most
common framework used to explain deeper levels of critical thinking is the one
developed by Benjamin Bloom, in 1956. The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives
described and explored six levels of critical thinking in the cognitive
domain. In 2001, this taxonomy was
revised by Anderson and Krathwohl, incorporating new knowledge. Essentially, the six levels of critical
thinking include:
Remembering:
Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling
relevant knowledge from long-term memory.
Understanding:
Constructing
meaning from oral, written, and graphic messages through interpreting,
exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining.
Applying:
Carrying out or using a procedure through
executing, or implementing.
Analyzing:
Breaking material into constituent
parts, determining how the parts
relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through
differentiating, organizing, and attributing.
Evaluating:
Making judgments based on criteria and
standards through checking and critiquing.
Creating:
Putting elements together
to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new
pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing.
Within learner-centered
teaching, a major emphasis should be to help students progress in their critical
thinking skills. In Appendix A, a chart
is provided that further describes each level of critical thinking, along with
verbs that can be used in assignments, projects, and discussions, along with
potential student “products” that will require the use of the various levels of
critical thinking.
The Importance of
Reflection in Learning
In
Kolb’s model above, reflection is one of the crucial steps of learning. Without
reflection, learning doesn’t occur.
Again, this is not about how to “memorize and recall” information. It’s about connecting, integrating, and
synthesizing experiences, information,
thoughts, and feelings with real-life application. Reflection is the bridge between what
“happens” and how it gets applied in life.
In helping students develop
critical thinking skills, reflection is essential. The question then becomes “How?” The answer is: “In a number of ways.”
You
will have some students in your classroom who will need to reflect internally. Often categorized as “introverts,” these
learners need to process their information through thinking, journaling, and by
themselves. In other words,
introverts “think to speak.” Contrast this with the extroverts, who struggle to
process information unless they are doing it externally, and with other people. They often think as they talk (and
sometimes talk before they think…), whereas introverts will typically think
about an answer for a while before they speak (if they share at all). In
other words, they “speak to think.” You
will be able to quickly observe who is who in your class, based on who is
typically answering questions versus who does not typically initiate an
answer. And you yourself probably fit
into one of the two categories. Neither
is the “best” way, but combined, this poses a challenge for a teacher: How to engage both introverts and extroverts
in your class in the practice of reflecting on their learning?
Tips
for engaging introverts and extroverts in discussion and reflection:
·
Know your own
preference!
·
Address this issue with
your students. Ask them to identify
where they would categorize themselves.
·
Ask the students to
identify how they best can be engaged (provide a way for introverts to
write their answers down!).
Introverts
|
|
Extroverts
|
·
Provide discussion / reflection
questions ahead of time
·
Allow time for them to
think, reflect before they answer
·
When facilitating class
or group discussion, make sure you “check in” with introverts to get their
input before the discussion moves on
·
Provide “reflection
breaks”
|
|
·
It’s okay to allow
extroverts to “process” or think out loud; encourage them to do this quietly
in pairs or threes to give introverts space to think
·
May need to coach
extroverts to not share as quickly, to let others have time to process
·
Give opportunity for
them to “think out loud” on paper
before verbalizing it
|
We
have provided a list of discussion / debriefing / reflection activities in this
packet. Note especially those activities
listed in the “Journaling” and “Reflection / Debriefing” sections of the index.
Note: Reflection is a discipline that is good for
faculty as well as students. Do you
practice reflection on your teaching and on your own learning?
Asking
Better Questions Improves Learning
Often the biggest challenge is to know how to ask better questions. It’s easy to get caught in using “Yes / No”
and “closed-ended” questions. And students
are used to getting these! Unfortunately,
they usually don’t yield quality discussions or reveal if learning has actually
occurred.
An open-ended question is designed to encourage a full,
meaningful answer using the subject's own knowledge and/or feelings. It is the
opposite of a closed-ended question, which encourages a short or
single-word answer. Open-ended questions also tend to be more objective and
less leading than closed-ended questions.
Keep in mind that you may want to have
discussion questions in pairs or small groups (4-5), to get more students
involved in the discussion. Pairs or
groups can then “report out” to the rest of the class.
Open-ended
questions typically begin with (or imply) words such as "Why" and
"How", or phrases such as "Tell me about..." Often they are
not technically a question, but a statement which implicitly asks for a
response. Examples:
Closed-ended Question s Open-ended Questions
How
many kids are in your family? Tell
me about your family.
Do
you hope to get a job after your graduate? Describe
the kind of job you would like.
Did
you get the answer right? How
did you get to that answer?
In
Appendix A, you’ll find a list of
verbs that correspond to the levels of critical thinking. These can be used to craft open-ended
discussion, reflection, and assessment questions. An example of how to use
these critical thinking verbs is in the following list of generic question stems. Keep this list handy! Generic question
stems serve a variety of purposes. That
can be provided to students as an aid in developing review or discussion
questions, or they can be used to generate questions as part of an activity or
for student reflection. (Adapted from
King, 1995 and Endres, 2003)
Generic Question Stems
·
Compare … and … with regard to…
·
Describe … in your own words.
·
Do you agree or disagree with this
statement…? What evidence is there to support your answer?
·
Explain how...
·
Explain why....
·
How are … and … similar?
·
How could …be used to …?
·
How does ... affect...?
·
How does … apply to everyday life?
·
How does … tie in with what we learned
before?
·
How does...apply to everyday life?
·
Summarize … in your own words.
·
What are the implications of...?
·
What are the strengths and weaknesses of
…?
|
|
·
What do we already know about...?
·
What do you think causes …? Why?
·
What does … mean?
·
What is … analogous to?
·
What is a counter-argument for …?
·
What is a new example of …?
·
What is another way to look at …?
·
What is the best … and why?
·
What is the counter argument for...?
·
What is the difference between … and …?
·
What is the meaning of...?
·
What is the nature of …?
·
What is the solution to the problem of …?
·
What is...analogous to?
·
What would happen if …?
·
Why is … happening?
·
Why is … important?
|
Suggestions for Using
Learning Activities
Keep
in mind that doing activities “just to do activities” will not aid the learning
process. Different activities are useful
for different purposes in teaching, but some activities can be used for more
than one purpose. More complex activities and or combinations of activities
will take longer than the minimum suggested time. Keep in mind that the activities can be
modified, combined with other activities, and /or tailored to meet your
specific goals. Make sure that the activity has a purpose directly tied to the
content being taught. As you plan, here
are some things to keep in mind:
- First,
determine what concept(s) you are trying to teach. (What do you want them
to learn?)
- Second,
determine how you will know if the concept has been learned?
- Then,
determine which activity (or activities) will best help teach that
concept.
(Adapted
from Wiggins and McTighe, 2005)
Characteristics of good
activities should:
- Relate to one or more
learning outcomes or critical thinking skills. (PURPOSE)
- Be appropriate for
the learning outcomes. (For example, it is very difficult for a student to
practice problem solving on a multiple-choice test.)
- Motivate and engage
students.
- Integrate assessment
and feedback. (ALWAYS REFLECT)
- Facilitate transfer
to real world applications.
- Require students to
make decisions based on facts, information, logic, and/or reasoning (Duch,
2001)
- May require students
to determine what information is needed and/or what steps or procedures
need to be taken (Duch, 2001)
- May be given in
stages with additional information in the second or later stages (Duch,
2001)
- Be complex enough to
engage whole group directly. (Duch, 2001)
- Include the
appropriate informational resources to support the learner such as
lecture, textbook, research materials, and so on.
Depending
on the use of a specific activity, it may not meet all of these
characteristics. For example, an
activity used to assess prior student knowledge may not meet the criteria of
practice with learning content and transfer to real world application. The same may be true of a content activity
used in place of a lecture as a way for students to generate the learning
content.
Finally:
A.
Be
creative.
B.
Be
flexible.
C.
Do
your own “reflection” after the activity to assess for its effectiveness, what
you would change, how you might use it again in the future.
Models
for Evaluating Student Performance in Learning Activities
One
of the challenges of using active learning techniques is what role they play in
evaluating student performance for purposes of determining a grade. Not
all learning activities need to be used as part of the student’s grade. However, if a significant part of the class
work involves active learning, this should be reflected in student grades. In some instances, students maybe more
motivated if the work will be graded.
Grading presents several challenges, especially for group activities.
In an active learning
environment, just like the real world, we can learn the most from our
mistakes. Students need the freedom and
safety to make mistakes without fear of the impact on their course grade.
In group projects, just
like in real life, students are often confronted by the “free-rider” problem of
a group member who does not contribute but shares in the group rewards. Advanced planning can reduce this concern by
employing a grading system that provides individual as well as group
accountability.
Writing assignments and
other projects could be quickly graded using a system of minus
(-),
check (√), and plus (+). The minus
symbol can be used to denote work that does not meet all standards, the check
that the work is acceptable, and the plus for work that demonstrates
excellence. For grading, these marks can
be translated into points such as 0 for no work, 1 for a minus, 2 for a check,
and 3 for a plus. Points from all
journals or other work can then be totaled and integrated into the course
grade.
Here
are some models for how to approach grading of learning activities to consider:
- Participation: Students receive
participation credit for participating in an activity
- Mastery
Learning: Students are required to demonstrate
mastery of an activity before receiving credit. (No one wants to fly with
the pilot who has not mastered landings!)
- Credit/No
Credit:
Students receive a score based on whether or not they achieved a minimum
set of standards defined in advance by the instructor. This mitigates the challenge of
comparing two or more student projects.
- Rubrics: A rubric provides a detailed breakdown of
what the criteria are for performance and what the different levels of
performance are. This allows the assignment of a different grade for
different projects in a way that is clear, fair, and objective to the
students.
- Journals/Progress
Reports:
Individual or group reflection
reports can be used to assess the level of student learning and thinking
that is occurring as well as different levels of involvement in a group
project.
- Presentations: A group or individual can be graded on
the presentation of a project rather than the project itself.
- Individual
Assignments: For a group project, each individual can
be required to produce their own project first as the basis for at least
partial grading. The group then
synthesizes the individual efforts into a common project.
Learning
Activities Grouped by Learning Strategy
The
following are suggested categories to get you started. You may discover that different activities
have more than one use and application of teaching strategy.
Learning Strategy Possible
Activities
Check
for Understanding
(Ways to review material; can be graded
or not graded. Emphasis is on “Have
students learned?”)
|
Background
Knowledge Probe
Comparative
Advance Organizer
Concept
Review
Data
Analysis
Defining
Features Matrix
Directed
Paraphrasing
Exam
Preparation Journals
Focused
Free Writing
Frame
Sentence
Futuring
|
Index
Card Match
One
Minute Paper / Muddiest Point
Quiz
Show
Reconsidering
Scavenger
Hunt
Think
/ Write / Pair / Share
Three
Step Interview
Visible
Quiz
What?
So What? Now What?
|
Classroom
Assessment Technique (CAT)
(Similar to Check for Understanding; can
be more formal) See Appendix C for 50 CATs
|
Concept
Review
Data
Analysis
Defining
Features Matrix
Directed
Paraphrasing
|
Index
Card Match
One
Minute Paper / Muddiest Point
Question
Creation
|
Critical
Thinking
(Helping students develop higher order
thinking skills)
|
Analytic
Memo
Article
Abstract
Categorizing
Grid
Concept
Map
Defining
Features Matrix
Failure
Analysis
|
Futuring
Guided-Discovery
Learning
Metacognition
Pro
and Con Grid
Question
Creation
Role
Play
|
Discussion
(Engages students in learning through
interaction with each other and the material)
|
Academic
Controversies
Class
Discussion
Fishbowl
Pairs
Check
Pass a
Problem
Pro
and Con Grid
|
Question
Creation
Rotating
Trio
Round
Table
Think
/ Write / Pair / Share
Three
Step Interview
|
Journaling
(Opportunities to reflect through
writing)
|
Contemporary
Issues Journals
Double
Entry Journal
Focused
Free Writing
|
Frame
Sentence
Open-Ended
Journals
Semi-structured
Journals
|
Problem-based
Learning
(For a more in-depth discussion on
Problem-based Learning, see Appendix B)
|
Activity
Matrix
Barnga
Concept
Map
Failure
Analysis
Futuring
Guided-Discovery
Learning
|
Jigsaw
Metacognition
Pairs
Check
Pass a
Problem
Role
Play
|
Reflection
/ Debriefing
(Reflecting on the learning that is
taking place, and connecting to future learning)
|
After
Action Review
Concept
Review
Double
Entry Journal
Focused
Free Writing
Laboratory
Notebook
|
Open-Ended
Journals
Pairs
Check
Round
Table
What?
So What? Now What?
|
Learning
Activities Indexed Alphabetically
Academic
Controversies……………………….…11
Activity
Matrix………………………………………...12
After
Action Review………………………………...12
Analytic
Memo…………………………………….….13
Article
Abstract……………………………….……….13
Background
Knowledge Probe…………………13
Barnga…………………………………………………….14
Categorizing
Grid…………………………………....16
Class
Discussion……………………………………….16
Comparative Advance
Organizer………….….16
Concept or Mind
Map…………………….………..17
Concept
Review……………………………….………18
Contemporary Issues
Journals……….…………18
Data
Analysis………………………………….………..18
Defining Features
Matrix………………….……..19
Directed
Paraphrasing………………………….….19
Double Entry
Journal………………………….…….20
Exam Preparation
Journals……………….……..20
Failure
Analysis……………………………….……….21
Fishbowl………………………………………….……….21
Focused Free
Writing…………………….…………21
Frame
Sentence…………………………….…………22
Futuring…………………………………………………...22
Guided-Discovery
Learning / Student Research………………………………………23
|
|
Guided Journals……….………………………………….22
Index Card
Match…………………………………………23
Jigsaw…………………………………………………………..24
Laboratory
Notebook……………………………………24
Listening
Teams……………………………………………25
Metacognition (Thinking
About Thinking)…….25
One Minute Paper /
Muddiest Point…………….26
Open-Ended
Journals……………………………………26
Pairs
Check…………………………………………………..26
Pass a
Problem……………………………………………..27
Pro and Con
Grid…………………….…………………….27
Question
Creation………………………………………..28
Quiz Show (aka
Jeopardy)…………………………….28
Reconsidering………………………………………………28
Role
Play………………………………………………………29
Rotating Trio………………………………………………..29
Roundtable…………………………………………………..30
Scavenger Hunt…………………………………………….30
Semi-structured
Journals……………………………...30
Think / Write / Pair /
Share…………………………..31
Three Step Interview…………………………………….31
Visible Quiz…………………………………………………..32
What, So What, Now
What?............................32
|
ACTIVITIES
Note:
Wherever possible, sources are cited for the listed activities.
Academic
Controversies
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Enables
students to understand different points of view on a problem and practice
representing a position.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Select an issue that has two or more well
defined positions such as pro and con.
2.
Pair up students and assign each pair a
position.
3.
Assign each pair the following tasks:
a.
Research and learn your assigned
position’s supporting arguments and information using instructor provided
resources, the textbook, library resources, and additional resources as
appropriate.
b.
Prepare a persuasive presentation in
support of your position.
4.
Group pairs so that each group has one
pair representing each position.
5.
Have each pair present their position to
the others in their group.
6.
Provide times for the groups to discuss
their opposing positions including asking challenging questions, asking for
data to support opposing positions, and providing counter arguments.
7.
Have the pairs switch positions so that
they now represent the opposing viewpoint as effectively as they can. Students should add additional information
and identify what the strong points are in each viewpoint’s position.
8.
Assign each group the task of creating a
report that synthesizes all perspectives.
Students should no longer advocate for any position, but work together
to reach consensus and appreciate the value of all sides. The report should identify the strongest
arguments for all sides and present a consensus viewpoint supported by facts
and data. All group members should
sign the final report to show their agreement.
9.
Give a quiz that covers all perspectives
to evaluate individual understanding of the perspectives.
10.
Students should review how well the
groups functioned and what could be improved for working through other
controversies.
|
Source:
|
Johnson
and Johnson, 1994
|
Notes:
|
|
Activity
Matrix
|
|
Category:
|
|
Suggested duration:
|
Ongoing,
throughout a class session as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
Allows
students to map activity, applications, tools, processes, methods, etc. to
why/when to use particular items.
|
Implementation:
|
1. In the
first column, the students list the activity, etc.
2.
In the second column the students list
why/when to use the activity, or how it would be applied in a real-life
situation.
|
Example:
Activity /
Application / Method etc.
|
Description
|
When to Use
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
Action Review
|
|
Category:
|
Reflection
/ Debriefing
|
Suggested duration:
|
10-15
minutes
|
Intent:
|
An
alternative structure for group reflection and debriefing after an activity.
(Similar to What? So What? Now What?)
|
Implementation:
|
§ Ask
why certain actions were taken.
§
Ask how they reacted to certain
situations.
§
Ask when actions were initiated.
§
Ask leading and thought provoking
questions.
§
Exchange "war stories" (lessons
learned).
§
Ask students what happened in their own
point of view.
§
Relate events to subsequent results.
§
Explore alternative courses of actions
that might have been more effective.
§ When
the discussion turns to errors made, emphasize the positive and point out the
difficulties of making tough decisions.
|
Source:
|
(Adapted
from) Department of the Army, 1993
|
Notes:
|
Especially
well suited for use after problem based learning activities.
|
Analytic
Memo
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking
|
Suggested duration:
|
Assignment
|
Intent:
|
Students write a one- or two-page
analysis of a specific problem or issue to help inform a decision-maker.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Select
which analytic methods or techniques you wish to assess.
2. Locate
or create a typical problem or situation for the students to analyze,
including the required background information (or requiring them to research
it).
3.
Develop an assignment sheet that explains
the student’s role in writing the memo, the identity of the audience, the
specific subject to be addressed, the analytic approach to be used, the
length required (usually 1-2 pages), and the assignment deadline.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
|
Article
Abstract
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking
|
Suggested duration:
|
Assignment
|
Intent:
|
Provides
active strategy for students to read and analyze articles in the discipline.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Instructor
selects an important article from the discipline being studied.
2.
Students write a summary or abstract of
the article.
|
Source:
|
Bean, 1996
|
Notes:
|
|
Background Knowledge
Probe
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Classroom Assessment Technique
|
Suggested duration:
|
5-10
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
identify the student’s current knowledge on a particular topic. Most often
used as an activity to activate the learning process.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Prepare
two or three open-ended questions or a few short-answer questions that will
probe the students’ existing knowledge of the subject or topic.
2. Students
can submit two-three sentence answers to each question.
3.
Collect these papers and review the
student answers before covering the topic.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
·
The Generic
Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating questions
for this activity.
·
This could also be done in pairs or
groups
|
Barnga
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
45-80
minutes (Be sure to leave enough time to debrief)
|
Intent:
|
To
have students learn more about non-verbal communication, teamwork, personal
biases, and intercultural awareness / diversity.
|
Implementation:
Materials Needed
(each table):
·
Copy
of rules
·
Deck
of cards (no face cards)
·
Poker
chips or other “token” (paper clips, toothpicks, popsicle sticks, etc.)
|
1. Arrange
the room so that there are separate places for each group (approximately 4 to
5 students per group) to play cards.
2. Set a
copy of the rules and a deck of cards (A-10 only, no face cards) at each
table.
3. Let
the students play a few rounds to get used to the rules at the table, with talking allowed at each table.
4. Then
remove the rules from each table, but continue to allow talking. Walk around
to each table, ensuring that each group understands the rules at that table.
From now on, the winner of each trick will receive one poker chip (or token
of your choice) BUT TALKING IS NOW PROHIBITED.
5. After
allowing a few rounds without talking, make the participant who won the most
tricks move clockwise to the next table, and the participant who won the
least number of tricks move counter-clockwise to the next table.
6. Play
continues at the new tables for a set number of minutes or rounds (WITH NO
TALKING). It is up to the participants at the tables to figure out how to
communicate to each other and which rules are correct.
What the players DO
NOT KNOW, is that each table has been playing with a different set of rules
(see below). Depending on the number of groups, you may choose to discard or
alter the rules as you see fit.
Table
1: Ace high, no trump
Table
2: Ace low, diamonds trump
Table
3: Ace low, clubs trump
Table
4: Ace high, hearts trump
Table
5: Ace high, spades trump
Table
6: Ace low, no trump
In
all cases, other cards will be worth face value—10 high, 2 low
Each table shares
the following rules (ADD the table-specific rules to each table’s set of
rules; remember- they don’t know it’s different at each table!):
·
Players are dealt 5 cards each
·
Whoever wins the most tricks will move
clockwise to the next table
·
Whoever loses the most tricks will move
counter clockwise to the next table
·
Everyone else stays at the same table
·
Ties are resolved by paper rock scissors
·
Each round will be about 5 minutes long
(longer if time allows) and each round will consist any number of games that
the time allows.
·
After the initial round, players will not
be allowed to see the rules or speak to each other. Gestures and pictures are
allowed, but players are not allowed to use words.
·
The game “winner” will be the person who
has won the most tricks in total. (Of course, once game play starts, winning
will likely take a back seat to trying to figure out what everyone else is
doing, as they are playing by different rules.)
·
Players can keep track of scores with
popsicle sticks (one stick per trick won).
·
The dealer can be anyone at the table,
the person who plays first will be to the right of the dealer .
·
The first player for each trick may play
ANY suit. All other players must follow suit (play a card of the same suit).
For each round, each player plays one card.
·
If a player does not have that suit, a
card of any suit must be played. The trick is won by the person with the
HIGHEST card of the ORIGINAL suit (players will begin to become confused when
some players believe their card is trump, and others disagree or contradict
this).
|
Source:
|
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/users/interculture/pcat6.htm
and http://www.cirhomepage.org/speech/speeches/the_barnga.doc Adapted from Thiagarajan and Steinwachs 1990
|
Notes:
|
The debriefing is
the most important part of this game, so be sure to
devote enough time to it. Below are some potential questions that you can use
for this process.
·
If you could describe the game in one word,
what would it be?
·
What did you expect at the beginning of
the game?
·
When did you realize that something was
wrong?
·
How did you deal with it?
·
How did not being able to speak
contribute to what you were feeling?
|
Copy the rules below for each table;
be sure to add their specific “rule” to the list, but don’t let them know
it’s different!:
Table
1: Ace high, no trump
Table
2: Ace low, diamonds trump
Table
3: Ace low, clubs trump
Table
4: Ace high, hearts trump
Table
5: Ace high, spades trump
Table
6: Ace low, no trump
BARNGA RULES
·
Players are dealt 5 cards each
·
Whoever wins the most tricks will move
clockwise to the next table when directed
·
Whoever loses the most tricks will move
counter clockwise to the next table when directed
·
Everyone else stays at the same table
·
Ties are resolved by “Rock, Paper,
Scissors”
·
Each round will be about 5 minutes long
(longer if time allows) and each round will consist of any number of games
that the time allows.
·
After the initial round, players will not
be allowed to see the rules or speak to each other. Gestures and pictures are
allowed, but players are not allowed to use words.
·
The game “winner” will be the person who
has won the most tricks in total. Players can keep track of scores with
popsicle sticks, toothpicks, poker chips, paper clips, etc. (one per trick
won).
·
The dealer can be anyone at the table;
the person who plays first will be to the right of the dealer.
·
The first player for each trick may play
ANY suit. All other players must follow suit (play a card of the same suit).
For each round, each player plays one card.
·
If a player does not have that suit, a
card of any suit must be played. The trick is won by the person with the HIGHEST
card of the ORIGINAL suit.
|
Categorizing
Grid
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking
|
Suggested duration:
|
Ongoing
in and/or out of class as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
To
have students practice placing items into specific categories.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Select
2 or 3 similar categories
2. List
several examples that fit into only one category.
3. Have
students assign the examples to categories
4.
Students explain their reasoning, either
in small or large groups.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
|
Class
Discussion
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion
|
Suggested duration:
|
15-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
bring out different points of view or concepts from a learner-centered point
of view.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Create
a set of discussion questions you can pose to students.
2. Tell
the students what the goal for the discussion is.
3.
Ask the question and let the students
answer/discuss/debate
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
Ensure that the discussion remains on
track and that all of the goals for the discussion are met before ending the
discussion. Teach the students to monitor the discussion to keep it on track.
·
The Generic
Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating questions
for this activity.
|
Comparative
Advance Organizer
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested duration:
|
5-10
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Helps
students learn new information in terms they already know. Prepares students for learning experience
(lecture, reading, or activity) by presenting comparisons or analogies that
connect the content either to familiar experiences or previously learned
material.
|
Implementation:
|
·
Instructor presents a brief (5-10 minute)
introductory lecture to establish linkages to other material.
·
You can have students work to establish
linkages to previous knowledge or material.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
Can also be done with a concept map, an
outline, or a student-generated list of questions or comments.
·
Related to Background Knowledge Probe
|
Concept or Mind Map
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning, Critical Thinking
|
Suggested duration:
|
10-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To have students
identify a main concept and relating concepts about a particular topic in a
visual manner.
A concept map is
a diagram showing the relationships among concepts. They are graphical tools
for organizing and representing knowledge.
Concepts, usually
represented as boxes or circles, are connected with labeled arrows in a downward-branching
hierarchical structure. The relationship between concepts can be articulated
in linking phrases such as "gives rise to", "results in",
"is required by," or "contributes to".
The technique for
visualizing these relationships among different concepts is called
"Concept mapping".
|
Implementation:
|
On a white board or posted flip chart paper
1.
Identify a main concept
2. Have
students identify concepts that are related to the main concept.
3. Students
should draw a line between related concepts a write the verb that relates the
concepts on the connecting line.
4.
Repeat this process connecting new
concepts to the related concepts and so on.
|
Source:
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_map
|
Notes:
|
An
alternative approach is to have students prepare a list of concepts on sticky
notes and organize the combined group of notes into a map of related
concepts.
|
Example:
Concept
Review
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Reflection / Debriefing
|
Suggested duration:
|
5-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
allow students a chance to review concepts you have covered in a previous
lesson or session.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Ask
students to identify an example for each of the concepts/theories/topics
covered in the lesson or questions
they might have
2. Direct
students to form pairs (or small groups) and review their answers with a
partner and come to consensus on at least one correct answer for each
question.
3.
Ask students to share their answers with
the entire class.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
|
Contemporary
Issues Journals
|
|
Category:
|
Assignment
|
Suggested duration:
|
None
(see below)
|
Intent:
|
Helps
students link course content to current events and relevant periodicals.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Students
read newspapers or other current periodicals (including discipline-specific
journals) to write about how course content relates to real world events.
2.
Students write a certain number of pages or
for a certain time each week, answering specific questions posed by the
teacher.
3.
Could have students share their findings
with class or groups.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
|
Data
Analysis
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Classroom Assessment Technique
|
Suggested duration:
|
10-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Allow students
to practice analyzing data and presentation skills.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Instructor
provides students with raw data such as lists, graphs, or tables.
2.
Students prepare an analysis of the data
to present to class.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
|
Defining
Features Matrix
|
|
Category:
|
Classroom Assessment Technique
|
Suggested duration:
|
10-30
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Assists
students practice identifying what the significant features are of similar
concepts.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Identify two concepts that have several
similarities. Students can readily confuse the characteristics of
key features or concepts that exhibit some similarities (e.g., hurricanes vs.
tornadoes, Lincoln vs. Douglas, Picasso vs. Matisse).
2.
List the important characteristics of the
two concepts . These may include characteristics that are similar
in both cases or different (or even absent in both cases).
3.
Generate a matrix. The
simplest matrix has two open columns on the right side that can be used by students
to place a + (feature is present) or – (feature is absent) and a wider
left-hand column with
|
Source:
|
Angelo and Cross,
1993
Also: http://www.uakron.edu/centers/cci/docs/CAT_defmatrix.pdf
|
Example:
Metamorphic
Rocks Defining Features Matrix
Complete the table below by placing a check mark in
the one or both of the two columns of the table
where appropriate. Identify which of the
characteristics in the left hand column are present in rocks
formed by contact and/or regional metamorphism. Do
not place a check mark in either column if the
characteristic is not present. One characteristic
has been completed as an example.
Characteristic
|
Rocks
|
|
contact
metamorphism
|
regional
metamorphism
|
|
Formed at temperatures above 200 C
|
+
|
+
|
May originally have been an igneous rock
|
+
|
+
|
Form as a result of increasing pressures
|
-
|
+
|
May surround plutonic igneous rocks
|
+
|
-
|
Slate is an example
|
-
|
+
|
Formed as a result of melting
|
-
|
-
|
Directed
Paraphrasing
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Classroom Assessment Technique
|
Suggested duration:
|
5-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
A
quick way for the instructor to identify where the students are at in their
understanding of a concept or idea.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Ask
students to define what a particular concept means to them in 1 or 2 concise
sentences. The definition should make
sense to other students and the instructor.
Another variation of this approach is to have students list as many
words as they can think of related to a concept or idea.
2. The
instructor engages students in quickly sorting responses into three
categories: “okay,” “not quite,” “ no idea.”
3.
Based on this feedback, the instructor
can begin to tailor class presentations and activities to address student
knowledge gaps or difficulties.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
Similar
to Background Knowledge Probe.
|
Double
Entry Journal
|
|
Category:
|
Journaling,
Reflection / Debriefing
|
Suggested duration:
|
Ongoing
as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
This
can be used for lectures, article reviews, videos, and other times when
students are typically passive to make students more active and
reflective.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Have
students first create an outline of the critical points and ideas of the presentation
in one column.
2.
Have the students write a response to
each point in the second column that addresses their reactions, feelings, and
questions.
|
Source:
|
Millis
and Cottell, 2003
|
Notes:
|
This
is a great way to have students take notes, and reflect on their thinking and
learning process.
|
Example:
Critical Points /
Ideas / Concepts
|
Response
(reactions, feelings, questions, etc.)
|
|
|
Exam
Preparation Journals
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested duration:
|
Ongoing
as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
Provides
an opportunity for students to reflect on the course and prepare for course
exams.
|
Implementation:
|
1. At the
start of the course, the instructor provides students with a list of essay
questions that the midterm and final exams will be drawn from.
2.
As the class progresses, students work
out answers to the questions in their journals.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
·
The instructor may allow the students to
use their journal during the exam, or review the journals during the exam and
assign bonus points based on the quality of the journal.
·
The Generic Question Stems can be used as
a starting point for generating questions for this activity.
|
Failure
Analysis
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking, Problem-based Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-90
minutes (more if assigned as a group project outside of class)
|
Intent:
|
To have students work through a problem
backwards, identifying why a solution or problem failed and determine
solutions that will work.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Provide
students with a case study or scenario that presents the topic with an
analysis of how it failed.
2.
Have
students research the scenario or case study.
3.
Direct
students to start from the failure and analyze the situation or scenario from
the failure to identify the main causes of the failure.
4.
Ask
students to write a paper or make a presentation about why the scenario or
case study failed and how it could have been avoided.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
Can
use the What? So What? Now What? To guide the analysis
|
Fishbowl
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
have a small group of students discuss an issue, topic, reading, etc. with
other students observing and eventually joining the discussion.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Select
3-4 students and have them bring their chairs to the front of the room
2. Give
the students a topic to discuss amongst themselves for 5-10 minutes as the
class observes
3. Before
the discussion winds down, ask for volunteers from the audience to take a
spot in the main discussion circle
4. Give
the students a new topic or allow the new participant to share their views on
the previous discussion
5. Repeat
as desired
|
Source:
|
Silberman,
1995
|
Notes:
|
You
can also conduct this activity as a multiple group activity, separating the
students into 3 or 4 groups and having the entire group switch places to take
the discussion in a new direction, etc. You may also want to consider giving
more complex questions as the discussions continue.
|
Focused
Free Writing
|
|
Category:
|
Journaling,
Reflection / Debriefing, Check for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
5-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Can
be used if students either have nothing to say or everyone wants to talk. Can
also be used to summarize lecture and or reading by having students summarize
main points of lecture, what they have learned, what does not make sense to
them, the “muddiest point,” or what questions they have.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Instructor assigns a general topic to
write on.
2.
Students write nonstop for a period of
time (such as 15 minutes). Don’t worry
about revision, punctuation, spelling, grammar, etc.
3.
Students turn in writing at the end of
the session
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
Fifteen
minutes should yield a page, but it could be longer.
|
Frame
Sentence
|
|
Category:
|
Journaling,
Check for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
5-15
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Provides
focus and starting point for student writing and analysis.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Instructor provides students with an
opening frame sentence for the start of a new paragraph or short essay.
2.
Students complete the paragraph or essay
with supporting details and/or generalizations.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
|
Futuring
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Critical Thinking, Problem-based Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-90
minutes (more if used as an out of class activity as well)
|
Intent:
|
Allows
students to forecast possible future scenarios based on existing conditions.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Instructor selects a current condition or
trend and asks the students to consider the following questions:
a.
What are the underlying causes that
created this trend?
b.
How likely is it that those causes will
stay the same, increase, or decrease in the future?
c.
What new developments might alter the
trend?
d.
If this trend changes, intensifies, or
decreases, what impacts will it have?
2.
Students use their answers to these
questions to develop scenarios of what the future will look like in a
specified time frame.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
Can
be done individually, in groups, or as whole class. Can also combine with Concept Map.
|
Guided Journals
|
|
Suggested
duration:
|
Ongoing
as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
Provides
an opportunity for students to reflect on the course and on particular
concepts identified by the instructor.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Instructor
provides very specific questions related to the content that week.
2. Students
write a certain number of pages or for a certain time each week answering
specific questions posed by the teacher.
3. Could
have students share their findings with class or groups.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
The
Generic Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating
questions for this activity.
|
Guided-Discovery
Learning / Student Research
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking, Problem-based Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-90
minutes (more if used as an out of class activity as well)
|
Intent:
|
Makes
the students responsible for discovering course content rather than an
instructor presentation.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
The instructor identifies key resources,
background information, and most importantly, provides a set of “guided”
critical thinking questions to the student. These questions are written with
an understanding of what critical thinking is needed to process the
information and construct knowledge.
2.
Critical thinking questions are provided
in a certain sequence, starting with directed questions, followed by
questions with a specific answer, with questions that can have multiple
answers last. These questions provide assistance in guiding students’ thought
processes toward the production of knowledge at the appropriate level of
attainment.
3.
Students do their own research
(individually or in a group) to locate the information rather than have the
instructor pre-select a reading or a lecture.
4.
Students may be required to present to
the rest of the class their findings.
|
Source:
|
Apple
and Krumsieg, 2000
|
Notes:
|
The
Generic Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating
questions for this activity.
|
Index
Card Match
|
|
Category:
|
Classroom Assessment Technique, Check for
Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30 minutes
|
Intent:
|
To review course concepts or to prepare
for an exam
|
Implementation:
|
1. Create
index cards containing concepts, theories, terminology, etc. and then on a
matching card, write the definition of that item
2. Combine
the two sets of cards and shuffle thoroughly
3. Have
the students draw a single card and explain that some students have
definitions and others have the theories, concepts, etc. that match the
definition cards
4. Direct
the students to find their match and then sit together without identifying to
others what item they have
5. Have
the students quiz the rest of the group on the topic by reading aloud the
definition or giving an example of the item.
|
Source:
|
Silberman, 1995
|
Notes:
|
·
You
can develop cards that are missing one word out of a sentence while the
corresponding card contains the missing word.
·
You
can also create an example card with multiple solutions and have the students
form groups instead of pairs (i.e. “What is an example of a way to give good
customer service?”) and when they quiz the group, they can obtain multiple
answers to the question.
|
Jigsaw
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-90
minutes (more if used as an out of class activity as well)
|
Intent:
|
Allows
students to either teach each other new content or review content.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Divide students into groups and assign
each group a portion of the content to be reviewed/presented.
2.
The first groups review the material and
plan how to teach the material to the other groups (preparation groups).
3.
Create new groups with one member from
each of the first groups (now called a teaching or presentation group).
4.
In the second groups, each group member
presents the material they covered in the preparation groups.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
You
will probably want to give the preparation groups some guidelines for what
they need to teach in the presentation groups (i.e. identify the 3-5 most
important topics from the chapter or the important points of a theory, etc).
You
may also want to use color coded stickers given to each member of the
preparation group to make the formation of the presentation group easier.
Another
variation on this activity is to reconvene the preparation groups to allow
the students to share what they learned in their other groups.
|
Laboratory
Notebook
|
|
Category:
|
Reflection
/ Debriefing
|
Suggested
duration:
|
Ongoing
as appropriate
|
Intent:
|
Enables
the students to reflect on what is occurring during an experiment or problem
solving exercise.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
In one column students record what they
observed or experienced in a lab or demonstration situation.
2.
In the second column, the student records
their thinking and reflections. They
address why they did something or what the results indicate to them.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
Similar
to Double Entry Journal. This approach
could also be used with solving a math problem or other type of problem.
|
Listening
Teams
|
|
Category:
|
Check for Understanding, Reflection /
Debriefing
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30 minutes after a short lecture,
video, presentation
|
Intent:
|
To help students stay focused and alert
during lecture, video, presentation
|
Implementation:
|
1. Assign
students to one of four roles:
a. Questioner –
students who will ask at least 2 questions about the lecture after it is
complete
b. Team Player –
students who will identify 2 areas of agreement with the lecture content and
explain why
c. Devil’s Advocate –
students who will identify 2 areas of disagreement with the lecture content
and explain why
d. Example Giver –
students who will give example or specific applications of the content
2. Give
your prepared lecture, video, presentation
3. Group
the roles together (all questioners, all team players, etc.) and give 10
minutes to formulate their responses to their assigned tasks
4. Break
the students into groups containing one of each role and allow them time to
discuss their questions, examples, etc.
|
Source:
|
Silberman, 1995
|
Notes:
|
You can also conduct this activity as a
large group session, by reconvening the group after the teams have had time
to formulate their responses and discussing each item as a large group.
|
Metacognition (Thinking About
Thinking)
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking, Problem-based Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
Ongoing
|
Intent:
|
To
have students express and document their thinking and problem solving
processes.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Have students talk through and develop a
description of how to go about solving a specific problem. One context for this is to tell the
students that they need to teach this to someone else who knows even less
than they do.
2.
Provide students with a sample of how an
expert would approach the problem or the commonly accepted way of going about
solving this problem. (Don’t tell the
students that they were wrong, because in the end they may have reached the
same destination. The focus is on the process.)
3.
Have students discuss how and why their
approach differed from the expert approach.
4.
Have students identify how they would go
about solving these types of problems in the future.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
|
One
Minute Paper / Muddiest Point
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding, Classroom Assessment Technique
|
Suggested
duration:
|
2-5
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
identify the student’s current knowledge on a particular topic. Most often
used as an activity (Background Knowledge Probe) at the beginning OR end of a
learning experience.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Identify
a question you want the students to answer relating to the topic or concept
you are about to teach or after you have taught.
2. Give
the students a sheet of paper and allow them to write as much as they know
about the topic in a defined amount of time.
3. Collect
these papers and review the student answers before covering the topic.
4. ALTERNATE
OPTION: Ask students what the
“muddiest point” is, or what is still
unclear to them about _________________.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
·
You can also use this as a reflection
activity after you have completed the instructional. You can give the
students back their original Background Knowledge Probe and ask them to
review it and make any changes to it so that they can visibly see the
differences occurring as a result of the learning experience.
·
The Generic
Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating questions
for this activity.
|
Open-Ended
Journals
|
|
Category:
|
Journaling,
Reflection / Debriefing
|
Suggested
duration:
|
Ongoing
|
Intent:
|
To
allow students an open place for reflection and commentary
|
Implementation:
|
1.
The student chooses what to address about
their learning such as what they read, summarize lectures, raise questions,
apply learning to personal experience, or any other topic related to the
class.
2.
Students write a certain number of pages
or for a certain time each week.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
|
Pairs
Check
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion,
Problem-based Learning, Reflection / Debriefing
|
Suggested
duration:
|
5-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Allows
students to review work with a peer and forces students to communicate
thinking to another.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Pairs of students complete the same
problems individually.
2.
Students compare answers.
3.
Students discuss and amend any
differences.
|
Source:
|
Millis
and Cottell, 2003
|
Notes:
|
|
Pass
a Problem
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning, Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
20-60
minutes (depending on the number of groups you allow to review each problem)
|
Intent:
|
Identify
and solve a problem related to course content.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Divide students into small groups.
2.
Have each group spend up to 10 minutes
identifying a problem (or you can give them a problem to solve).
3.
Have that group of students brainstorm
and write down their solutions to the problem. Allow up to 10 minutes for
this.
4.
Have the groups pass their problem /
solution to another group for review and then the second group can add to the
original solutions.
5.
Continue until all groups have had a
chance to see/solve each problem.
6.
Have the group that generated the problem
initially review all solutions and either pick the best one or create a new
one that synthesizes two or more of the solutions.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
You
can also do this by posting flip chart papers on the walls around the room
(one per problem) and have the groups rotate.
|
Example (on full
sheet of paper):
Problem
|
|
Possible
Solutions
|
|
Pro
and Con Grid
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking, Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
None
|
Intent:
|
Allows
students to practice identifying the pros and cons of an issue.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Select a decision, judgment, dilemma, or
an issue
2.
Write a prompt that will trigger pros and
cons in relation to the issue or dilemma.
3.
Let the students know how many pros and
cons to list and whether you want words and phrases or complete sentences.
|
Source:
|
Angelo
and Cross, 1993
|
Notes:
|
·
A variation on this is to assign the
students a perspective or role on the issue.
·
You can also have them determine the
issue to be discussed
|
Example:
Issue:
|
|
Pros
|
Cons
|
|
|
Question Creation
|
|
Category:
|
Critical
Thinking, Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
5-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
have students develop a set of questions related to class content or a
problem.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Have students brainstorm possible
questions related to course content
2.
Have students select 2-3 best questions
and explain why these each question is a good question.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
The Generic Question Stems on page can be
used as a starting point for generating questions for this activity.
·
You could use this to generate potential
questions for projects, exams, Checks for Understanding, etc.
|
Quiz
Show (aka Jeopardy)
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-60
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Technique
for reviewing course material using groups.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
The students develop their own questions
in a group or individually.
2.
The instructor or students group(s) the
questions into categories and assigns point values.
3.
The instructor serves as an emcee for a
quiz show using the questions and awarding points to the teams that answer
the questions correctly.
|
Source:
|
Millis
and Cottell, 1998
|
Notes:
|
The
Generic Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating
questions for this activity.
|
Reconsidering
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-20
minutes, at the beginning and end of a class, session or chapter
|
Intent:
|
Technique
for allowing students to write about what they think something will be
beforehand, then go back afterward and reassess their feelings about the item
after they have completed it.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Before a course, a chapter, or before a
major project, ask the student to write their views on the item answering
possible questions such as:
a.
What makes a good project?
b.
What is the value of __________ topic?
c.
What advice would they give themselves to
be _______ ____
d.
What solutions could they devise to a
problem you will pose at the end of the chapter or unit?
2.
Collect these papers, but tell students
that you are not going to grade them.
3.
At the end of the course or unit, go back
and ask the same question again, asking the students write for the same
amount of time.
4.
Hand students their original papers for
comparison, so they can see how their views have become more sophisticated
over time
|
Source:
|
Silberman,
1996
|
Notes:
|
Can
be used with Background Knowledge Probe
|
Role
Play
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning, Critical Thinking
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30
minutes (can be longer)
|
Intent:
|
To
have students act out, in pairs, small or large groups, a topic or concept
from the class
|
Implementation:
|
1. Provide
roles, positions, or perspectives to students or groups of students; assist
with assigning roles or clarification as needed.
2. Direct
students to research their topic or role and allow the students enough time
to work through how they want to perform the simulation.
3. Have
the students perform the role-play.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
You
can also provide a scenario or case and require students to negotiate or find
a solution based on their role.
·
You can pair students so that everyone is
involved in a role play at the same time. You can also add a third student as
an observer of each pair to provide feedback to the role players.
·
The
important portion of this activity is the reflection / debriefing afterward.
Some suggested questions you can prime the audience to consider while the
students are conducting the role play are:
You
can also use the What? So What? Now
What? debriefing activity.
|
Rotating
Trio
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
have students discuss issues with many different students
|
Implementation:
|
1. Form
groups of three students
2. Direct
the students to assign numbers to each group member (1, 2, or 3)
3. Distribute
a set of questions for the group to discuss and set a time limit (10 minutes)
for the discussion
4. Call
time after the discussion dies down or the time limit has been reached
5. Direct
the #1s to stay put and raise their hands
6. Direct
the #2s to move to the group on their left
7. Direct
the #3s to move to the group on their right
8. Distribute
another (more complex) set of discussion questions building upon the first
set for the new group to discuss
9. Rotate
trios in this manner as many time as desired
|
Source:
|
Silberman,
1995
|
Notes:
|
|
Roundtable
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion,
Reflection
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
allow the students a chance to identify solutions to a problem or issue in a
more reflective manner than traditional brainstorming.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Have
students form groups (optional)
2. Ask
the students to write their idea for a solution to the
problem/issue/concept/topic on a sheet of paper.
3. Let
them know that it is okay to pass if they don’t have a solution at that time
(but only allow a certain number of “passes”)
4. Direct
students to read their solution to the group before passing the paper to
another student (this saves everyone from having to read what others have
written)
5. Pass
the next person and repeat.
|
Source:
|
Silberman,
1995
|
Notes:
|
|
Scavenger
Hunt
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-30
minutes
|
Intent:
|
Provides
an opportunity for students quickly review a concept, chapter, or syllabus to
identify important points.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Instructor provides a set of scavenger
hunt questions
2.
Students, either alone or in groups, go
through the designated material to locate the requested information.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
Scavenger
hunts can be excellent tools for having students practice the skill of
quickly skimming for pertinent information, but can also be used as an
advance organizer or classroom assessment tool to determine which topics
students had problems with and allow the instructor to focus more on these
activities.
|
Semi-structured
Journals
|
|
Category:
|
Journaling
|
Suggested
duration:
|
Ongoing
as appropriate (see below for additional suggestions)
|
Intent:
|
Provides
an opportunity for students to reflect on the course or on a particular
concept identified by the instructor.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Instructor provides a set of generic
questions to initiate the student’s writing.
2.
Students write a certain number of pages
or for a certain time each week.
|
Source:
|
Bean,
1996
|
Notes:
|
The
Generic Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating
questions for this activity.
|
Think / Write / Pair /
Share
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion,
Check for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
5-15
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
allow students a chance to formulate an opinion on a topic and then share
that opinion with others.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Pose a
question or problem to your students
2. Direct
students to spend a few minutes answering the item on their own
3. Direct
students to pair up with someone and share their answers to the problem or
topic
4. Debrief
this activity by asking students to share what they heard that was
interesting, not their original answer.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
You can use this as a paired activity
that moves into increasingly larger groups to eventually reach a group
consensus on a topic or issue.
·
The Generic Question Stems can be used as
a starting point for generating questions for this activity.
|
Three
Step Interview
|
|
Category:
|
Discussion,
Check for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
20-40
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
identify a problem or issue for discussion.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Part One:
a. Pair
the students or allow them to select a partner.
b. Give
them time to decide who will be the interviewer and who will be the
interviewee.
c. Allow
them two minutes to do an interview using a set of instructor developed
questions
d. After
two minutes, switch roles
2.
Part Two:
a. Form a
group of four by joining another pair.
b. Interviewers
present what you learned from your interviewees
3.
Part Three: Debriefing (5 minutes)
a. Reach
consensus on what is the best example of an answer to the selected question
identified in your group interviews.
b. Identify
a spokesperson to share this finding with everyone.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
·
You can use this activity as a precursor
to the Pass a Problem activity to help define the problems to be discussed.
·
The Generic Question Stems can be used as
a starting point for generating questions for this activity.
|
Visible
Quiz
|
|
Category:
|
Check
for Understanding
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
To
allow review of material from reading, prior knowledge, or prior to a test.
|
Implementation:
|
1. Instructor
prepares questions or have students prepare questions in advance on
PowerPoint slides. (Alternate: Have
students prepare questions)
2. Students
are divided into groups and each group given a set of cards marked A, B, C,
D, T, and F for multiple choice and true/false answers.
3. Instructors
pose question and students respond as a group by displaying the appropriate
letter for their answer
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
The
Generic Question Stems can be used as a starting point for generating
questions for this activity.
|
What, So
What, Now What?
|
|
Category:
|
Reflection
/ Debriefing
|
Suggested
duration:
|
10-20
minutes
|
Intent:
|
A
three step process to allow to debrief an activity or experience, and discuss
ways to incorporate into future experiences (similar to After Action Review)
|
Implementation:
|
1. What? The discussion begins by essentially
asking, “What has happened?” or “What’s been going on?” The What? phase pertains to the
substance of your experiences. It is intended to elicit descriptive responses about facts and occurrences.
2. So what? The So What?
phase pertains to the impact of the experience on the participants themselves. It looks at the
consequences of recent occurrences and tries to make sense of them. The
participants are asked to abstract
and generalize what they are learning, shifting from the descriptive into the interpretive.
3. Now
What?
The final phase of the discussion, the Now what? phase, involves taking the lessons learned from the
experience and reapplying them to
other situations and the larger picture. This includes considering
not only the participants’ plans for their next activity or expereince, but
also how they can apply all of this knowledge and experience to other realms
of their lives (e.g., as family members, friends, citizens).
|
Source:
|
Adapted
from EarthForce.org and other sources
|
Notes:
|
|
Appendix A
Using Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy to
Create Critical Thinking Focused Activities & Assignments
Level & Definition
|
Actions
|
Verbs
|
Potential Student
Products
|
Remembering:
Retrieving,
recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge from long-term memory.
|
recognizing, listing, describing, identifying, retrieving, naming, locating, finding
|
draw, identify, locate, label, select, write,
outline, list, recite, name, record, state, repeat
|
quiz, definition,
fact, worksheet,
test, label, list,
workbook, reproduction;
events, recordings, dictionary, TV shows, text
reading, magazine articles
|
Understanding:
Constructing meaning from oral, written,
and graphic messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying,
summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining.
|
interpreting, exemplifying, summarizing, inferring, paraphrasing, classifying, comparing, explaining
|
confirm, explain, convert, infer, discuss, relate,
match, describe, estimate, paraphrase, predict
|
recitation, summary, collection, explanation, show
and tell, example, quiz, list, label, outline; analogy, graph, speech,
collage, drama, poster, story, photo, cartoon, diagram
|
Applying:
Carrying out or
using a procedure through executing, or implementing.
|
implementing, carrying out, using, executing
|
apply, modify, build, construct, solve, report, sketch, produce
|
illustration, simulation, sculpture,
demonstration, presentation, interview, performance, diary, journal; diagram,
photo, forecast, illustration, list, project, puzzle, cartoon, Powerpoint
|
Analyzing:
Breaking material
into constituent parts, determining
how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose
through differentiating, organizing, and attributing.
|
comparing,
organizing, deconstructing, attributing,
outlining,
structuring,
integrating
|
analyze, sort,
categorize, investigate, compare, debate, differentiate, examine
|
survey, database, mobile, abstract, report, graph,
spreadsheet, checklist, chart, outline; syllogism, model, conclusion,
argument broken down, questionnaire
|
Evaluating:
Making judgments
based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing.
|
checking, hypothesizing, critiquing,
experimenting, judging, testing, detecting, monitoring
|
solve, critique, criticize, appraise, assess,
conclude, justify, judge
|
debate, panel,
report, evaluation, investigation, verdict,
conclusion, persuasive speech; editorial, conclusion, valuing,
self-evaluation, group discussion, recommendation, court trial, survey
|
Creating:
Putting elements
together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a
new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing.
|
designing, constructing, planning, producing, inventing, devising,
making
|
combine, compose, design, generate, invent, plan, formulate, originate, devise, revise,
hypothesize
|
film / video,
story, project,
plan, new game,
song, media product, advertisement, painting;
poem, play, article, book, invention, experiment, cartoon, set of rules,
principles or standards
|
Appendix B
Problem-Based
Learning
|
|
Category:
|
Problem-based
Learning
|
Suggested
duration:
|
30-90
minutes (more if used as an out of class activity as well)
|
Intent:
|
Students
apply knowledge learned through individual or group problem solving.
|
Implementation:
|
1.
Choose a central idea, concept, or
principle in the course. List the
learning objectives related to this concept that students should meet when
they work through the problem.
2.
Think of a real world context for the
problem. Develop a story or case
around the problem. Add complexity and
ill-structured qualities to limit the ability of students to adopt a “plug
and chug” approach.
3.
Structure and plan the problem:
a.
What will the first stage look like? What
open-ended questions can be asked? What learning issues should be identified?
b.
How long will the problem be? How many stages? How much in and out of class time?
c.
What information will students receive in
second and later stages as they work through the problem?
d.
What resources will students need? Will
the students need to do additional research on their own?
e.
What end product will students produce at
the completion of the problem?
4.
Write a guide for using the problem in
class. Plan for mini-lectures, class
discussion, and small group reporting to support the problem solving process.
|
Source:
|
|
Notes:
|
The problems that you provide to the
students can come in a variety of forms
Also, a set of problems can be
considered analysis problems such as:
·
Identify
and order the sequential steps of a process
·
Characterize
a set of phenomena by their component elements
·
Identify
causes leading to an event or the consequences derived from an event
·
Break
an event into problems and the actions taken to solve them and the problems
these actions created
·
Determine
cause and effect
·
Examine
parts of a whole and their relationships
·
Determine
the similarities and differences of a place, event, or people
·
Break
into and identify parts
|
Appendix
C
50 Classroom Assessment Techniques
(CATS)
Source: Angelo,
T. A. and Cross, K. P. (1993) Classroom
Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for
College Teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Techniques
for Assessing Course-Related Knowledge & Skills
I.
Assessing Prior Knowledge, Recall, and Understanding
The
CATS in this group are recommended to assess declarative learning, the content of a particular subject.
1.
Background Knowledge Probe: Short, simple questionnaires prepared by
instructors for use at the beginning of a course or at the start of new units
or topics; can serve as a pretest; typically elicits more detailed information
than CAT2.
2.
Focused Listing:
Focuses students’ attention on a single important term, name, or concept
from a lesson or class session and directs students to list ideas related to
the “focus.”
3.
Misconception/Preconception Check: Focus is on uncovering prior knowledge or
beliefs that hinder or block new learning; can be designed to uncover incorrect
or incomplete knowledge, attitudes, or values.
4.
Empty Outlines:
In a limited amount of time students complete an empty or partially
completed outline of an in-class presentation or homework assignment.
5.
Memory Matrix:
Students complete a table about course content in which row and column
headings are complete but cells are empty.
6.
Minute Paper:
Perhaps the most frequently used CAT; students answer two questions:
What
was the most important thing you learned during this class? And what important
question remains unanswered?
7.
Muddiest Point:
Considered by many as the simplest CAT; students respond to one question
(What was the muddiest point in _________ ?); well suited to large, lower
division courses but not to those which emphasize integration, synthesis and
evaluation.
II. Assessing Skill in Analysis and
Critical Thinking
The
CATS in this group focus on analysis—the
breaking down of information, questions, or problems to facilitate
understanding and problem solving.
8.
Categorizing Grid:
Students complete a grid containing two or three overarching concepts
and a variety of related subordinate elements associated with the larger
concepts.
9.
Defining Features Matrix:
Students categorize concepts according to presence or absence of important
defining features.
10.
Pro and Con Grid: Students list pros/cons,
costs/benefits, advantages/disadvantages of an issue, question or value of
competing claims.
11.
Content, Form, and Function Outlines: In
an outline form, students analyze the “what” (content), “how” (form), and “why”
(function) of a particular message (e.g. poem, newspaper story, billboard,
critical essay); also called “What, How, & Why Outlines.”
12.
Analytic Memos:
Students write a one- or two-page analysis of a specific problem or
issue to help inform a decision-maker.
III. Assessing Skill in Synthesis and
Creative Thinking
The
CATS in this group focus on synthesis—each
stimulate the student to create, and allow the faculty to assess, original
intellectual products that result from a synthesis of course content and the
students’ intelligence, judgment, knowledge, and skills.
13.
One-Sentence Summary:
Students answer the questions “Who does what to whom, when, where, how,
and why?” (WDWWWWHW) about a given topic and then creates a single informative,
grammatical, and long summary sentence.
14.
Word Journal: involves a two-part response; first,
the student summarizes a short text in a single word and second, the student
writes 1-2 paragraphs explaining the word choice.
15.
Approximate Analogies:
Students simply complete the 2nd half of an analogy—a is to b as x is to y; described as approximate because rigor of formal logic is not
required.
16.
Concept Maps:
Students draw or diagram the mental connections they make between a
major concept and other concepts they have learned.
17.
Invented Dialogues:
Students synthesize their knowledge of issues, personalities, and
historical periods into the form of a carefully structured illustrative
conversation; two levels of invention (select and weave quotes from primary sources
or invent reasonable quotes that fit characters and context).
18.
Annotated Portfolios: Students assemble a very limited
number of examples of creative work and supplement with own commentary on
significance of examples.
IV. Assessing Skill in Problem Solving
The
CATS in this group focus on problem
solving skills of various kinds—recognition of types of problems,
determining principles and techniques to solve, perceiving similarities of
problem features and ability to reflect and then alter solution strategies.
19.
Problem Recognition Tasks:
Students recognize and identify particular problem types.
20.
What’s the Principle?:
Students identify principle or principles to solve problems of various
types.
21.
Documented Problem Solutions: Students
track in a written format the steps they take to solve problems as if for a
“show & tell.”
22.
Audio- and Videotaped Protocols: Students work through a problem solving
process and it is captured to allow instructors to assess metacognition
(learner’s awareness of and control of thinking).
V. Assessing Skill in Application and
Performance
The
CATS in this group focus on students’ abilities to apply important knowledge—sometimes referenced as conditional
knowledge—knowing when and where to apply what they know and can do.
23.
Directed Paraphrasing: Students paraphrase part of a lesson for a
specific audience, demonstrating ability to translate highly specialized
information into language the clients or customers can understand.
24.
Application Cards: Students generate examples of
real-work applications for important principles, generalizations, theories or
procedures.
25.
Student-Generated Test Questions:
Students generate test questions and model answers for critical areas of
learning.
26.
Human Tableau or Class Modeling:
Students transform and apply their learning into “doing” by physically modeling
a process or representing an image.
27.
Paper or Project Prospectus:
Students create a brief plan for a paper or project based on your guiding
questions.
Techniques for Assessing Learner Attitudes,
Values, and Self-Awareness
VI. Assessing Students’ Awareness of
Their Attitudes and Values
The
CATS in this group are designed to assist teachers in assessing students’ attitudes, opinions, values, and
self-awareness within the course curriculum.
28.
Classroom Opinion Polls:
Students indicate degree of agreement or disagreement with a statement
or prompt.
29.
Double-entry Journals:
Students record and respond to significant passages of text.
30.
Profiles of Admirable Individuals:
Students write a brief description of the characteristics of a person they
admire in a field related to the course.
31.
Everyday Ethical Dilemma:
Students respond to a case study that poses a discipline-related ethical
dilemma.
32.
Course-related Self-Confidence Surveys: Students complete an anonymous survey
indicating their level of confidence in mastering the course material.
VII. Assessing Students’ Self-Awareness
as Learners
The
CATS in this group are recommended to help students express personal goals and clarify self-concept in order to make a
connection between the articulated goals and those of the course.
33.
Focused Autobiographical Sketches: Students write a brief description of a
successful learning experience they had relevant to the course material.
34.
Interest/Knowledge/Skills Checklists:
Students complete a checklist survey to indicate their knowledge, skills and
interest in various course topics.
35.
Goal Ranking and Matching:
Students list and prioritize 3 to 5 goals they have for their own learning in
the course.
36.
Self-Assessment Ways of Learning:
Students compare themselves with several different “learning styles” profiles
to find the most likely match.
VIII. Assessing Course-Related Learning
and Study Skills, Strategies, & Behaviors
The
CATS in this group focus both student and teacher attention on the behaviors the student actually engages
in when trying to learn.
37.
Productive Study-Time Logs:
Students complete a study log to record the quantity and quality of time spent
studying for a specific course.
38.
Punctuated Lectures: Students briefly reflect, then create
a written record of their listening level of a lecture. Repeat twice in the
same lecture and 2-3 times over two to three weeks.
39.
Process Analysis:
Students outline the process they take in completing a specified
assignment.
40.
Diagnostic Learning Logs:
Students “write to learn” by identifying, diagnosing, and prescribing solutions
to their own learning problems.
Techniques for Assessing Learner
Reactions to Instruction
IX. Assessing Learner Reactions to
Teachers and Teaching
The
CATS in this group are designed to provide context-specific
feedback that can improve teaching within a particular course.
41.
Chain Notes: On an index card that is distributed
in advance, each student responds to an open-ended prompt about his or her
mental activity that is answered in less than a minute.
42.
Electronic Survey Feedback:
Students respond to a question or short series of questions about the
effectiveness of the course.
43.
Teacher-designed Feedback Forms:
Students respond to specific questions through a focused feedback form about
the effectiveness of a particular class session.
44.
Group Instructional Feedback Technique:
Students respond to three questions related to the student’s learning in the course.
45.
Classroom Assessment Quality Circles: A
group or groups of students provide the instructor with ongoing assessment of
the course through structured interactions.
X. Assessing Learner Reactions to Class
Activities, Assignments, and Materials
The
CATS in this group are designed to give teachers information that will help
them improve their course materials and
assignments.
46.
RSQC2 (Recall, Summarize, Question, Connect and Comment): Students write brief statements that recall,
summarize, question, connect and comment on meaningful points from previous
class.
47.
Group-Work Evaluation:
Students complete a brief survey about how their group is functioning
and make suggestions for improving the group process.
48.
Reading Rating Sheets:
Students complete a form that rates the effectiveness of the assigned
readings.
49.
Assignment Assessments:
Students respond to two or three open-ended questions about the value of
an assignment to their learning.
50.
Exam Evaluations:
Students provide feedback about an exam’s learning value and/or format.
Source: Angelo,
T. A. and Cross, K. P. (1993) Classroom
Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for
College Teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Appendix
D
Design Template for Class
Session
Stage 1 –
Desired Results
|
||
Established
Goals
|
||
|
||
Understandings: Students
will understand that…
|
Essential
Questions
|
|
|
|
|
Students will know…
|
Students will be able to…
|
|
|
|
|
Stage 2 –
Assessment Evidence
|
||
Performance
Tasks
|
Other
Evidence
|
|
|
|
|
Stage 3 –
Learning Plan
|
||
WHERETO
W (where it’s going, what’s expected)
H (hook and hold interest)
E (equip, explore, experience)
R (opp. to rethink and revise)
E (evaluate work)
T (be tailored)
O (be organized)
|
|
|
References and Additional Resources
Anderson,
L.W. and Krathwohl (Eds.). (2001). A
Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy
of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.
Angelo, T. A. and Cross, K. P. (1993) Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Apple,
D., Duncan-Hewitt, W., Krumsieg, K. and Mount, D. (2000). Handbook
on Cooperative Learning. Corvallis, OR: Pacific Crest.
Apple,
D. K. and Krumsieg, K. (2001). Curriculum Design Handbook. Lisle, IL:
Pacific Crest.
Bacon,
D., Stewart, K., and Silver, W. (1999). Lessons from the Best and Worst Student
Team Experiences: How a Teacher Can Make the Difference. Journal of Management
Education, 23(5), 467-488.
Bean,
J. C. (1996). Engaging Ideas. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bloom,
B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., and Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The
Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York, David McKary.
Boylan,
H. R. and Saxon, D. P. (1999). Outcomes
of Remediation. Prepared
for The League for Innovation in the Community College. Retrieved from
the World Wide Web: http://www.ncde.appstate.edu/reserve_reading/what_works.htm.
Boylan, H. R. (2002). What Works: Research-Based Best Practices in Developmental Education. Boone, NC: Continuous Quality Improvement
Network with the National Center for Developmental Education.
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (2000). The Social Life of Information. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard
Business School Press.
Change
Management Monitor. (2004). Scenarios and Futuring. Retrieved January 20, 2004
from the World Wide Web: http://www.change-management-monitor.com/articles/34-scenarios.html.
Department of the Army. (1993). A Leaders Guide To After Action
Review (TC 25-20).
Dick,
W., Carey, L., and Carey, J. (2000). The Systematic Design of Instruction (3rd
edition). Glenview, IL: Addison Wesley Publishing
Duch,
B. (2001). Writing Problems for Deeper Understanding. In B. Duch, S. Groh, and
D. Allen (Eds.). The Power of Problem-Based Learning (pp. 47-58). Sterling, VA:
Stylus.
Endres,
C. (2003). Generic Question Stems. Retrieved December 30, 2003 from the World
Wide Web: http://www.wright.edu/~carole.endres/genericquestions.htm.
Felder,
R. and Brent, R. (2004). Navigating the Bumpy Road to Student-Centered
Instruction Retrieved January 21, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/Resist.html.
Field-Tested Learning Assessment Guide.
(2004). Concept Mapping. Retrieved
January 20, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.flaguide.org/cat/minutepapers/conmap2.htm.
Friere,
P. (1970). The Pedagogoy of the Oppressed.
New York, NY: Continuum.
Foundation
for Critical Thinking. (2003)
Socratic Teaching. Retrieved March 11, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.criticalthinking.org/university/socratict.html.
Gagne,
R. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction (4th
Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Gagne,
R., Briggs, L., and Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th
edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Goldsmith,
M. (2004). Leave It at the Stream. Fast
Company, May 2004, 103.
Grubb,
N. and Associates. (1999). Honored but
invisible: An inside look at community college teaching. New York:
Routledge.
Hake,
R. (2002). Lessons from the physics education reform effort. Conservation Ecology 5(2): 28. Online: http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art28.
Hale,
S. (2004). Concept Mapping. Retrieved January 20, 2004 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.dc.peachnet.edu/~shale/humanities/composition/handouts/concept.html.
Harvard-Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics. (1997) Can We
Believe Our Eyes? Retrieved January 8, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.learner.org/resources/series26.html.
Harvard-Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics. (1997) A Private
Universe. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.learner.org/resources/series28.html.
Johnson,
D. and Johnson, F. (1994). Joining
Together: Group Theory and Group Skills.
5th Edition. Boston,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Jonassen,
D. (2000). Toward a Design Theory of Problem Solving. Educational
Technology and Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.
Jonassen,
D. and Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002).
Case-based Reasoning and Instructional Design:
Using Stories to Support Pproblem Solving. Educational Technology and Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77.
Kagan,
S. and Kagan, M. (1994). The Structural Approach: Six Keys to Cooperative Learning.
In S. Sharan (Ed.). Handbook of
Cooperative Learning Methods (pp. 115-136). West Port, CT: Praeger.
Keller,
J. M., (1983). Development and Use of the ARCS Model of Motivational Design
(Report No. IR 014 039). Enschede, Netherlands: Twente Univ. of Technology.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 313 001).
King, A.
(1995). Guided peer questioning: A
cooperative learning approach to critical thinking. Cooperative
learning and college teaching, 5(2), pp. 15-19.
Kolb,
D. (1984). Experiential learning:
Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Kruse,
K., Keil, J. (2000). Technology-based Training. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Lanzig,
J. (1997). The Concept Mapping Homepage. Retrieved January 20, 2004 from the
World Wide Web: http://users.edte.utwente.nl/lanzig/cm_home.htm.
Lave,
J. and Wegner, E. (1991). Situated Learning, Legitimate peripheral
participation. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Mager,
R. (1997). Preparing Instructional
Objectives: A Critical Tool in the Development of Effective Instruction (3rd
edition). Atlanta, GA: Center for Effective Performance.
McKeachie,
W.J. (2002). Teaching tips: Strategies,
research, and theory for college and university professors. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
McKeachie,
W., Chism, N., Mengies R., Svinicki, M. and Weinstein, C. (1994). Teaching
Tips: Strategies, Research and Theory for College and University Teachers
(9th ed.). Lexington, Massachusetts: Heath and Company
.
Merrill,
D. M. (1997). Instructional Strategies that Teach. CBT
Solutions, November/December, 1-11.
Merrill,
M. D. (In press). First Principles of
Instruction. Educational Technology and
Research and Development.
Millis,
B. and Cottell, P. 1998. Cooperative Learning for Higher Education
Faculty. Westport, Connecticut: Oryx
Press.
Millis,
B. and Cottell, P. 2003. Cooperative
Learning for Higher Education Faculty. The Art and Craft of Teaching, 23rd
Annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Oxford, Ohio, November 20-23.
Nadkarni,
S. (2003). Instructional Methods and
Mental Models of Students: An Empirical Investigation. Academy of Learning and Education, 2(4), 335-351.
Oxford
Center for Staff Development. (1995). Going Deep. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 5(1), 4.
Reiser,
R. (2001). A History of Instructional
Design and Technology: Part II: A History of Instructional Design. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 49(2), 57-67.
Rowell,
Katherine. (2003). Integrating Data Analysis Early into the Curriculum. The Art and Craft of Teaching, 23rd
Annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Oxford, Ohio, November 20-23.
Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., and Donovan, S. 1999. Effects of small-group learning on
undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A
meta-analysis. Review of Educational
Research, 69(1) 21-52.
Stahl,
N., Simpson, M., and Hayes, C. (1992). Ten recommendations from research for
teaching high-risk students. Journal of
Developmental Education, 16(1), 2-10.
Stolovitch,
Harold and Keeps, Erica. (2003). Telling
Ain’t Training. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and
Development.
Twigg,
C. (2004). Using Asynchronous Learning in Redesign: Reaching and Retaining the
At-Risk Student. Journal of the Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(1), 7-15.
University
of North Carolina. (2003). Developing Lesson Plans. Retrieved January 19, 2004
from the World Wide Web: http://www.ils.unc.edu/daniel/214/lesson
plans.html.
University
of St. Thomas. (2004). Concept- or Mind-Mapping for Learning. Retrieved January
20, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.iss.stthomas.edu/studyguides/mapping/.
Weimer,
M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wlodkowski,
R. and Ginsberg, M.B. (1995). Diversity
and motivation: Culturally responsive teaching. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Young,
S. and Shaw, D.G. (1999) Profiles of effective college and university teachers.
Journal of Higher Education, 70(6),
670-686.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment