University of Phoenix
─
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 2
Week One Readings 3
Literature Review Examples 3
Library Tips and Strategies 3
UOPX Scholarship 8
Week Two Readings 12
Learning Theorists 12
Theorist Resource Guide 13
Adapting Courses Using the Principles of Course Design 23
Advocating Student Learning by Adapting Courses 39
College Guidelines for Adapting Courses 41
Week Three Readings 45
Learner-Centered Environment 45
Metacognition 47
The Role of Classroom Assessment 50
Week Four Readings 54
Description of the Classroom Management Tool (CMT) 54
CMT – Qualitative Participation 56
ABC Facilitation Model and the CMT 60
CMT – Qualitative Feedback 61
The Socratic Method and Student Feedback 63
Week One Readings
Week One opens with an activity and discussion centered on scholarship at UOPX. Participants reflect on their current knowledge of UOPX scholarship activities and explore the overall benefits of scholarship involvement. Additionally, participants will take a refreshing look at the use of research and the literature review process, as it applies to advanced facilitators’ scholarship and classroom instruction. Scholarship will be applied in the sense of erudition beyond concluding one’s degrees. Literature will be defined as current, available material relating to a subject area of expertise and, in this certification, a scholarly journal from the University Library. As with all valuable tasks, reflection and advocate exploration will round out the process.
The focus this week is to employ the literature review as a tool to stay progressive and fresh in one’s discipline. The selected reading on the hermeneutic circle literature review method presents a system of identifying a small number of highly relevant publications versus a huge number of potentially relevant publications on a specific topic to quicken the process of finding germane information. Various search techniques are offered in the Electronic Reserve Readings; some familiar, some new. The most current tools of the University Library are summarized in the Library Tips and Strategies reading to help facilitate research.
This twist to the literature review process is a quick investment in staying up-to-date in one’s field of expertise and does not require an opinion on the sources, but a dissemination of the material, such as a unique overview or stepping-stone. In that vein, the deliverable involves a self-created visual. The goal is to practice simplifying material into a visual for ease of audience comprehension. This also provides a different presentation of the material that reaches multiple learning styles. The Secrets of Readable Charts offers ideas for creating visuals.
Literature Review Examples
Examples of Literature Reviews can be found in the Week One Readings.
Library Tips and Strategies
The university provides an extensive online library for active faculty with 24/7 access from eCampus anywhere there is an Internet connection. Tapping into the University Library will uncover a broad spectrum of documents catalogued and ready for use. There is an outstanding collection of eBooks, scholarly journals, multimedia content, current industry periodicals, and more. The library’s collection of resources is continually updated and expanded to provide up-to-date and relevant information. Examples of resource types include the following:
• Articles
• Audio files
• Conference proceedings
• Dissertations
• Essays
• Financial data
• Images
• Industry reports
• Video files
• White papers
The newest supplements to the University Library include:
• Khan Academy focuses on providing free educational materials on a variety of subjects for a wide range of learners. It includes videos, interactive lessons, and online assessments on topics such as math, science, finance and economics, humanities, and computer science.
• A permalink to ebooks published by Signma Theta Tau International was added to the University Library’s website. This permalink directs users to the publisher’s collection that is accessible through the University Library’s ebrary Academic Complete package. Sigma Theta Tau International is a Nursing Honor Society that supports the learning, knowledge and professional development of nurses.
• Cabell's Directories Cabell's Directories provides access to detailed information about scholarly journals that is designed to help researchers and academics match their manuscripts with journals that are most likely to publish them. Cabell’s provides information such as contact information, publication information, the journal’s review process, and manuscript specifications.
Supplements within the last six months are as follows:
• Computers and Applied Sciences Complete database from EBSCOhost covers a variety of topics on computer and applied sciences, including traditional engineering challenges and research, computer theory and systems, and new technologies. It contains abstracts for over 2,200 academic and professional publications and full-text for more than 1,020 periodicals.
• Entrepreneurial Studies Source offers access to 150 periodicals, numerous case studies and company profiles, and over six hundred videos with transcripts. It covers a variety of entrepreneurial topics including business planning, communications, innovations, management, marketing, organizational behavior, product development, raising capital, and risk taking, among others.
• Literary Reference Center Plus from EBSCOhost provides access to full text content from literary reference resources, literary journals and magazines and more on thousands of authors and their works across literary disciplines and timeframes. A breakdown of the content is as follows:
o Over 35,000 plot summaries, synopses and overviews
o Close to 100,000 literary criticism articles and essays
o Over 257,000 author biographies and over 7,300 author interviews
o Over 660 literary journals
o Over 705,000 book reviews
o Over 99,000 classic and contemporary poems
o Over 23,100 classic and contemporary short stories
o 40 full-text study guides
o 72 literary videos
o Over 8,200 classic texts
• Films on Demand database includes documentaries, educational films, and even full length production of stage plays and operas. It is divided into sections by content area:
o Humanities and Social Sciences
o Business and Economics
o Science and Mathematics
o Health and Medicine
o Archival Films and Newsreels
Faculty members may use these videos as an additional resource to enhance class discussions. A shortcut for students can be set up by creating a user account. Playlists can be created for students saving whole films or segments.
Google Scholar is important to mention here. This is a customized version which highlights full-text content found within the University’s collection. It searches scholarly literature across multiple disciplines and sources
Biographies can be useful at times for facilitation. You can view biographies of historical figures in the American National Biography resource under Encyclopedias and Dictionaries. You should also be able to find biographies in several of the other resources listed under Encyclopedias and Dictionaries. Once in the resource, in the Search by Name box, type the name of a historical figure (example: Ansel Adams). Once the results appear, click on the name of the person whose biography you wish to view.
The University Library’s Sage Reference interface was re-vamped by Sage and re-named Sage Knowledge. Sage Knowledge provides access to full-text encyclopedias and handbooks on various subject areas including business, education, health care, philosophy, social science, and criminal justice, and technology. Sage Knowledge is accessible under the Encyclopedias and Dictionaries heading on the University Library homepage.
All of these new resources are accessible under the View All Resources Alphabetically heading on the University Library homepage.
The University Library houses more than 240,000 unique publications, including peer-reviewed and refereed materials, from over 280 resources that provide scholarly content generally unavailable through free web search utilities.
Active faculty have access to the following eBook resources:
• APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology offers an in-depth examination of the types of behavioral and structural issues that I/O psychologists study every day, from both a theoretical and applied perspective.
• Books 24X7provides thousands of electronic books and videos on a variety of business and technology subjects, including leadership, project management, graphic design, programming, and telecommunications, from notable publishers such as IBM Press, John Wiley and Sons, and McGraw-Hill Osborne. Topics include 50 Lessons, Leadership Channel, Business, Executive Summaries, IT and Technical, Office, and Industry.
• Books@Ovid is a searchable collection of clinical texts in nursing and health sciences from Lippincott, Williams and Wilkinson. Specific titles cover topics in critical care, pediatric nursing, emergency medicine, pharmaceutical drug references, nursing research, and theory. The complete text of each book is viewed in an interlinked interface, giving quick access to research and reference information. While Books@Ovid is a searchable database of book content for in-depth research, the contents are not downloadable electronic books.
• Business Book Summariesprovides an extract of the key concepts of the best business books. Enabling executives, managers, and individuals, quick access to the latest in business thought. Following a rigorous selection process, expertly-written summaries are created for the top business books published each year. The BBS library offers hundreds of summaries with new ones added weekly.
• Dissertations & Theses@University of Phoenixprovides access to doctoral dissertations completed by learners at the University’s School of Advanced Studies.
• Ebrary is a comprehensive database of e-books and other authoritative materials that cover a variety of topics. Specific subject areas include business and economics, IT, education, engineering, history, political science, humanities, language and literature, law, life science, medicine, nursing, physical sciences, psychology, religion, philosophy, sociology, and anthropology. Ebrary has recently added over 1,000 Science & Technology ebooks to its Academic Complete collection that the University Library provides access to. ebrary as a whole provides access to over 70,000 ebooks that cover a variety of subjects including business and economics, IT, education, engineering, history, political science, humanities, language and literature, law, life science, medicine, nursing, physical sciences, psychology, religion, philosophy, sociology, and anthropology.
Ebrary has an Android™ app, available on Google Play.
• Emerald eBooks currently offers access to a growing collection of over 650 volumes from over 80 ebook series titles. Providing contemporary and high quality research, this collection covers topics in the fields of business, management, economics, education, environmental management/environment, health care management/healthcare, language and linguistics and sociology and public policy.
• Forensic & Law Enforcement netBASE is a collection of digital reference material focusing on forensic science, law enforcement, and criminal justice.
• Info Security netBASE provides an electronic collection of reference material focusing on information security, IT management, and IT auditing.
• ITECH netBASE provides a variety of reference materials focusing on the study, design, development, implementation, support, and management of computer-based information systems. They cover how to securely convert, store, protect, process, transmit, input, output, and retrieve information.
• MyiLibrary includes over 150 eBook titles by various publishers such as: Elsevier Science and Technology, Blackwell, Cambridge University Press, Taylor and Francis, and Wiley. This suite of e-books focuses on various topics in Business Management, Psychology and Criminal Justice. While this is a searchable database of book content for in-depth research, the contents are not downloadable electronic books
• ProQuest Dissertations and Theses – Full Text contains the full text of over a million dissertations and theses from universities throughout the United Stated and Canada. Almost all dissertations published since 1997 are available online with numerous older dissertations added continuously.
• PsycBOOKS, a resource from the American Psychological Association (APA), is a database of more than 13,000 chapters from over 700 books published by the APA and other distinguished publishers. The database includes scholarly titles published by the APA from copyright years 1953 - 2004.
These eBooks are accessible under the View All Resources Alphabetically and Books, Dissertations, and Theses headings on the University Library home page.
A single search allows examining multiple library resources at once, retrieving the most relevant information while helping reduce search time. Results are categorized by relevancy, based on keywords and indexing. Most materials can be saved or downloaded at no cost to keep for future reference. For faculty with visual or hearing impairments, most library information is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.If you have any questions about any of the University Library’s content, just click on Ask A Librarian on the University Library homepage or email the reference desk at library@phoenix.edu.
Helpful library tools include the following:
• Ask a Librarian provides research assistance when needed. Submit a request to a staff librarian and receive an email response within 12 hours, even on weekends.
• Online Tutorials help users navigate the individual resources, and the overall library site.
• Alerts can be set up to send an e-mail or RSS feed to automatically notify the user each time a new issue for a journal title offered in the library is available (See the Help menu in EBSCOhost for instructions).
• Text-To-Speech can read web articles or portions aloud while you are doing something else.
• MP3 Download is available for many eBooks and for the articles in the Text-to-Speech feature.
• Library Folders are available to store your favorite articles and journals, along with any download.
• An optional tutorial on advanced research techniques is available for those who would like more direction on using the library
All of the above allow for a supply of potential material to use for future scholarship and classroom instruction. All of the information you need is at your fingertips to quickly access, from the comfort of your home or office.
UOPX Scholarship
UOPX Scholarship Philosophy
According to the UOPX Faculty Handbook (2011), the university encourages faculty members to be actively involved in professional and academic scholarly activities like research, faculty development, and academic inquiry. Faculty at UOPX engage in research initiatives, author or co-author research works, participate in postdoctoral fellowships, serve on boards at local and regional levels, partake in volunteer efforts, and conduct academic presentations.
UOPX has a clear definition of scholarship based on the Boyer Scholarship Model. Boyer’s model features four distinct dimensions of scholarship: discovery, integration, application, and teaching.
[pic](University of Phoenix, 2012)
“Discovery — build new knowledge through traditional research.
Integration — interpret the use of knowledge across disciplines.
Application — aid society and professions in addressing problems.
Teaching — systematically study and improve teaching models and practices to achieve optimal measurable learning outcomes.” (“Faculty Research Programs,” 2012, para. 1)
UOPX Scholarship Opportunities
There are a number of scholarship opportunities at UOPX. The University offers the following programs to foster and promote scholarship:
Teaching and Learning Research Fellowship
Candidates who are selected for the Teaching and Learning Research Fellowship program will receive comprehensive research support. This includes access to classrooms and teaching environments, funding assistance, and expert guidance. Fellowship projects are focused on research with a connection to teaching and learning within the UOPX classroom. Funding opportunities are up to $10,000 based on project scope (“Faculty Research Programs,” 2012).
General Grants
The general grants program is designed to help faculty conduct meaningful, independent research. This scholarly inquiry does not have to be directly related to teaching and learning like the Teaching and Learning Research Fellowship. A faculty member may elect to explore the teaching and learning topics but on a smaller scale. Research findings derived from this program are expected to be disseminated through scholarly/professional channels. Award amounts of up to $5,000 can be earned (“Faculty Research Programs,” 2012).
Excellence in Publishing Award
This award recognizes faculty for their contributions to peer reviewed publications or other scholarly sources. Faculty recognized for their scholarly efforts in this program receive a $500 award. Selection is based on the impact of the contribution to teaching and learning (“Faculty Research Programs,” 2012).
Faculty Honorarium Program
A $200 publication or presentation honorarium is available to UOPX faculty. This program recognizes faculty scholarship in a wide variety of endeavors that connects to the UOPX definition of scholarship. Publications and presentations considered under the program must illustrate a professional affiliation with UOPX (“Faculty Research Programs,” 2012; “Research at UOPX,” 2012).
Please visit the following websites for more information about UOPX scholarship opportunities:
If you have questions about UOPX scholarship opportunities, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support at: oss@phoenix.edu.
Library Resources
To support faculty scholarship, the University Library provides access to the following resources.
Cabell’s Directories provides access to detailed information about scholarly journals that is designed to help researchers and academics match their manuscripts with journals that are most likely to publish them. Cabell’s provides information such as contact information, publication information, the journal’s review process, and manuscript specifications.
Papers Invited is a searchable directory that focuses on calls for papers for forthcoming worldwide conferences and special issues of scholarly journals. Calls for participation arrive from various areas including professional associations, universities, journal editors, and other conference organizers.
Faculty Matters
The UOPX quarterly publication, Faculty Matters, features faculty scholarship. Each issue highlights a section on scholarship and research as it applies to teaching and learning. Look for the Scholarship Spotlight column!
References
Apollo Research Institute. (2011). About us. Retrieved from
University of Phoenix. (2011). 2011-2012 Faculty handbook. Retrieved from
University of Phoenix, Faculty website.
University of Phoenix. (2012). Faculty research programs. Retrieved from
programs.html
University of Phoenix. (2012). [Figure of Boyer’s Scholarship Model]. Retrieved
from
programs.html
University of Phoenix. (2012). Research at UOPX. Retrieved from the University
of Phoenix, Faculty website.
Week Two Readings
Welcome to Week Two of the Advanced Facilitator Certification! The material covered this week provides participants with an opportunity to learn about the formalized process of adapting course deliverables to align with established content and structured learning objectives. Currently, faculty are accustomed to facilitating a centrally designed and managed course. The university’s newest learning platform will allow faculty the flexibility to adapt their courses to provide a more individualized learning experience for the student and further increase the student's engagement. A focus on design principles and adapting courses based on these principles is paramount for supporting this initiative. Additionally, a glimpse at traditional learning theories and theorists will further support these efforts.
Learning Theorists
There are numerous theorists we could identify as applicable for adapting course content and assessments, but our focus here is on traditional theorists versus behavioral theorists. Nine key learning theorists stand out as beneficial when analyzing course design principles:
• Benjamin Bloom
• John Keller
• Howard Gardner
• Robert Gagne
• David Merrill
• Roger Schank
• Malcolm Knowles
• Jerome Bruner
• Ralph Tyler
In addition, we realize that this list is void of women theorists, but the foundation on which we are focusing was a time where women were not necessarily prominent in this field of study. We do, however, want to mention three women that did contribute to course design theories: Hulda Knowles, Maria Montessori, and Gisela Labouvie-Vief.
The Theorists Resource Guide on the following page highlights each theorist and the unique characteristics of each one’s contributions to course design. After examining the learning theories and how they apply to principles of course design, we can progress to exercising these principles in adapting our classroom instruction.
Theorist Resource Guide
Benjamin Bloom
Benjamin Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy has been the most prevalent model for teaching and learning thinking skills. The taxonomy refers to a classification of the different learning objectives that educators set for students (Paul, 1985).
Bloom’s taxonomy was first presented in 1956 through The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. Bloom considered the handbook as the least read, but most widely cited book in American education field (Flinders, 1996). He identifies six cognitive processes: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation; teamed with three knowledge dimensions: factual, conceptual and procedural.
Bloom explains, “We intended the taxonomy as a method of classifying educational objectives, educational experiences, learning processes, and evaluation questions and problems. We did not intend to provide a constraint on educational philosophy, teaching methods or curriculum instruction” (Paul, 1985, p. 39).
In 2000, a revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy was introduced by Anderson and Krathwohl which uses verbs instead of nouns and exchanges the top two levels (Lightle, 2011, p. 6). This provides a more instructive and useful way of implementing this taxonomy. It makes facilitator and learner reflection easier as usage patterns transpire. In addition, metacognitive was added to include four knowledge dimensions (Wilson, 2006).
[pic]
With the birth of the Internet, Andrew Churches permutated Bloom’s taxonomy again by connecting the verbs to technology related verbs/actions and further described how technology is used to provide a more learner-centric environment; this more recent permutation is termed, “Bloom’s digital taxonomy” which is found at (Lightle, 2011, p. 6).
“Kathy Schrock (2011) has also developed a matrix based on Bloom’s revised taxonomy…, which will help you choose a [technology] tool to support your lesson goals” (Lightle, 2011, p. 7). Schrock references various Google, iPad, Android, and Web 2.0 tools on her site for classroom use.
Robert Gagne
Gagne's early investigations into the psychological bases of effective teaching led him to believe that an instructional technology or theory must go beyond traditional learning theory. Gagne concluded that instructional theory should address the specific factors that contribute to learning complex skills (Lawson, 1974).
According to Gagne, nine events activate processes needed for effective learning. Gagne believes all lessons should include this sequence of events: gain attention, inform learner of objectives, simulate recall of prior learning, present stimulus material, provide learner guidance, elicit performance, provide feedback, assess performance, enhance retention and transfer (Lawson, 1974).
John Keller
Keller has made significant contributions as a scholar and practitioner of instructional systems design. First, he expanded Gagne’s focus on the learner’s ability to do something to the learner’s will to do something. Second, he expanded the motivation focus from Skinner’s extrinsic view to an intrinsic one. Furthermore, Keller laid important groundwork for developing a systematic, learner-focused design model based on the contributions of several significant theories, such as behaviorism, cognitivism, and humanism. Because of his emphases on a wide range of theoretical bases, Keller refers to his work as a theory and a macro model (Keller, 1999).
According to Keller, there are four major categories of motivational strategies: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (1999, pp. 44-45).
|Table 4.2. Mini-Design for the Development of Motivational Messages in Distance Education Courses |
|ARCS Categories |
|Design Factors |Attention | Relevance |Confidence |Satisfaction |
|Precourse attitudes of |New students are strong in the |Decision to take the course is, |A sensitive area, as the mode of |Successfully completing the |
|students toward distance |beginning, gradually diminishing|most of the time, voluntary. No |instruction is new and |course is an important step in |
|learning |as novelty wears off. Probably |big problems expected in |unfamiliar. Generally |the direction of a degree. |
| |low level of attention for |relevance. May improve as |satisfactory for experienced and | |
| |repeaters. |learners apply what they have |successful distance education | |
| | |learned, or decrease if not what|learners. Repeaters anxious about| |
| | |was expected. |pitfalls; new-comers uncertain. | |
| | | |Also, there is no peer support. | |
|Midterm attitudes toward |Initially high attention and |Continues to provide an |If they are confident in the |Reasonable, but dissatisfaction |
|distance learning |curiosity wear off as courses |interesting possibility to make |beginning, this wears off. |sometimes sets in. Repeaters and|
| |are not exciting and sometimes |a career move or to show what is|Evaluation system is not |new students are soon |
| |boring. |learned. Time conflicts with |encouraging. No motivational |disappointed about the limited |
| | |other activities occur. |support included in course. Low |interaction and about studying |
| | | |level of confidence for |in isolation. |
| | | |beginners. | |
|Student reactions to course |Initially high, but decreases |Course content is relevant, but |Confidence that it can be done |Remains reasonable |
|content |due to lack of novelty and |too little interactivity to help|soon fades due to volume of work,| |
| |variation in content and |students learn how to apply it; |lack of support, and lack of | |
| |learning strategies. |some material is outdated |opportunity to see growth and | |
| | | |application. | |
|Characteristics of student |Minimal; only contact is through|Feedback is usually limited |Feedback is mostly worded in a |Low because of lack of |
|support during the course |feedback on assignments. Nothing|strictly to course content. No |positive way, but occasionally |meaningful and personal contact.|
| |unusual or unexpected happens. |creative feedback shows |too general. | |
| | |connections to students. | | |
|Summary |Initial attention soon slips. |Relevance usually continues |Confidence depends heavily on |Satisfaction is not a big |
| | |through the course, although it |results, but is generally low. |problem, or would not be if the |
| | |becomes less important. |This area needs extensive |other issues were resolved. |
| | | |motivational treatment. | |
|Examples of motivational |Bring pacing into the course and|Provide occasional extra |Emphasize that students can do it|Make turnaround time for |
|tactics to be used in |offer tutor's assistance. Use |material, such as a publication.|if effort is put into the course.|assignments short. Ensure that |
|motivational messages |the student's name and include |Provide creative feedback and |Reassure students by showing |tutors are accessible. Refer to |
| |personal comments in feedback |link feedback to a learner's |personal interest and concern. |positive feelings a learner will|
| |messages. Provide an unexpected |work and daily circumstances. |Make them feel part of a group |have when the course is |
| |communication to students from | |who are all struggling to get it |completed successfully. Reward |
| |time to time. | |done. Show empathy. Provide |early completion through |
| | | |encouragement and personal |complimenting learners |
| | | |challenges at times that are |personally. |
| | | |known to be low points in the | |
| | | |term. | |
|(Keller, 1999, pp. 44-45) |
Howard Gardner
Howard Gardner's work of multiple intelligences has profoundly affected educational thinking and practice, especially in the United States. Here we explore the theory of multiple intelligences, why it has found a ready audience amongst educationalists, and some issues around its conceptualization and realization (Brualdi, 1998; and Kezar, 2001).
Gardner initially formulated a list of seven intelligences. His listing was provisional. The first two have been typically valued in schools; the next three are usually associated with the arts; and the final two are what Gardner called personal intelligences (Brualdi, 1998; and Kezar, 2001).
• Linguistic intelligence involves sensitivity to spoken and written language, the ability to learn languages, and the capacity to use language to accomplish certain goals.
• Logical-mathematical intelligence consists of the capacity to analyze problems logically, carry out mathematical operations, and investigate issues scientifically.
• Musical intelligence involves skill in the performance, composition, and appreciation of musical patterns.
• Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence entails the potential of using one's whole body or parts of the body to solve problems.
• Spatial intelligence involves the potential to recognize and use the patterns of wide space and more confined areas.
• Interpersonal intelligence is concerned with the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations, and desires of other people.
• Intrapersonal intelligence entails the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one's feelings, fears, and motivations (Brualdi, 1998; and Kezar, 2001).
M. David Merrill
“For the past several years I have been engaged in an attempt to identify first principles of instruction, those principles on which different instructional design theories are in essential agreement regardless of their theoretical or philosophical orientation” (Merrill, 2002, p. 41).
The Pebble in the Pond Approach is Figure 2 in Merrill, 2007, p. 8. “Compared to other instructional development approaches this model more effectively designs products that incorporate first principles of instruction” (Merrill, 2007, pp. 6-7).
Roger Schank
Schank’s philosophy of training emphasizes learning by doing, preferably on the job, as long as doing so doesn't distract the learner or the company, and providing learners the opportunity to get advice from experts, often in the form of illuminating stories, whenever they are ready to listen (Beach, 1993).
Goal-based scenarios (GBS) is a learn-by-doing simulation approach that encourages learners to pursue goals using assistance and guidance provided by the interactive system. A GBS may be implemented as a teacher-led activity or, in this case, as a computer simulation. A GBS is a response to perceived limitations in traditional instruction, particularly fact-centric instruction, de-contextualized and unconcerned with intrinsic motivation. A GBS rests on the foundation that learning is a process that entails identifying goals, producing questions, and addressing those questions. All of these elements are pursued as a part of simulation that is made to resemble a situation. According to Schank, Berman, and Macpherson (as cited in Chung-Yuan & Moore, 2009), a GBS should consist of the following features: the learning goals, the mission, the cover story, the role, the scenario operations, the resources, and feedback.
Malcolm Knowles
Malcolm Knowles' andragogy, the adult equivalent of pedagogy, is a leading brand in adult education theory (Bartle, 2008).
Andragogy makes the following assumptions about the design of learning: adults need to know why they should learn something; adults must learn experientially; adults approach learning as problem-solving; and adults learn best when the topic is of immediate value (Bartle, 2008).
In practical terms, andragogy means that instruction for adults must focus more on the process and less on the content. Strategies such as case studies, role-playing, simulations, and self-evaluation are most useful. Instructors adopt a role of facilitator or resource rather than lecturer or grader (Bartle, 2008).
Jerome Bruner
As early as 1967, Jerome Bruner introduced a theory of instruction that examined the relationship between content and process (Nagowah & Nagowah, 2009).
Discovery learning is a method of inquiry-based instruction; discovery learning believes that it is best for learners to discover facts and relationships for themselves (Nagowah & Nagowah, 2009).
Proponents of this theory believe discovery learning has many advantages, including the following:
• Encourages active engagement
• Promotes motivation
• Promotes autonomy, responsibility, independence
• Develops creativity and problem solving skills
• Develops a tailored learning experience (Nagowah & Nagowah, 2009)
Ralph Tyler
Ralph Tyler is said to be the most influential curriculum writer to have developed step-by-step procedures for every aspect of curriculum planning, development, and evaluation (“Ralph W. Tyler,” 2004). Ralph Tyler’s rationale poses the four questions he urges all curriculum developers to raise as a means of building curriculum programs:
• “What are the school's educational purposes?
• What educational experiences will likely attain these purposes?
• How can the educational experiences be properly organized?
• How can the curriculum be evaluated?” (“Ralph W. Tyler,” 2004, para. 4)
Hulda Knowles
Her co-authorship of books with her husband Malcolm Knowles regarding group dynamics and leadership is well established. She ascribed to the andragogy theory and wrote, "To describe a growing body of applied knowledge, or technology, which attempts to translate the findings and theories of basic knowledge into practical principles and methods" (Yablonsky, 1959, p. 788). She sought to develop better leaders through education.
Maria Montessori
Maria Montessori was a leader in the theory of student-centered learning and focused her research on the educational principles of the teacher’s role stressing the importance in assisting development based on repetition and profound concentration (Weinberg, 2009, p. 34).
“On January 6, 1907, at 58 via dei Marsi in the San Lorenzo quarter of Rome, the first Casa dei Bambini or ‘Children’s House,’ opened its doors under the guidance and direction of Maria Montessori. This event is not only important to Montessori history, but is monumentally important in the history of world education—probably as important as the educational method of teaching critical thinking through questioning, developed by Socrates in the 5th century BCE in Athens, Greece.” (Weinberg, 2009, p. 30)
Maria saw the, “…role of the teacher as scientific observer; the role of an enriched environment as the catalyst for learning; the precise construction of didactic materials for sensory motor education; and the principles to be followed during individual instruction” (Weinberg, 2009, p. 33). Montessori felt that an individual can only achieve success if they have an, “…education leading to self-control, self-possession, analytical thought, and learning achievement” (Weinberg, 2009, p. 35).
Gisela Labouvie-Vief
Gisela Labouvie-Vief applied Piaget’s theories to adults. Labouvie-Vief suggests, “…that because many individuals at this [emerging adulthood] developmental stage are in transition, the support of appropriate contexts (such as those related to education and work) is of great importance” (Labouvie-Vief, 2005, p. 60). She also notes that the comprehension of these “…complex forms of intersubjectivity forms the basis of many important adult accomplishments, such as…the approach and degree of participation in education” (Labouvie-Vief, 2005, p. 80).
References
Bartle, M. S. (2008). Andragogy. Research Starters Education, 1. Retrieved from
& site=ehost-live
Beach, B. K. (1993, October). Learning with Roger Schank. Training &
Development, 47(10), 39-43. Retrieved from
e=ehost-live
Brualdi, A. (1998, November/December), Gardner’s theory. Teacher Librarian,
26(2), 26–28. Retrieved from
e=ehost-live
Chung-Yuan, H., & Moore, D. (2009). An example implementation of Schank’s
goal-based scenarios. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve
Learning, 54(1), 58–61. Doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0364-9
Flinders, D. (1996, Spring). Bloom’s taxonomy. History of Education Quarterly,
36(1), 76–78. Retrieved from
9&site=ehost-live
Keller, J. M. (1999, Summer). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer-
based instruction and distance education. New Directions for Teaching &
Learning, (78), 39–46. Retrieved from
e=ehost-live
Kezar, A. (2001, Winter). Theory of Multiple Intelligences: Implications for Higher
Education. Innovative Higher Education, 26(2), 141–154. Retrieved from
& site=ehost-live
Labouvie-Vief, G. (n.d.). Emerging structures of adult thought. In J. J. Arnett & J.
L. Tanner (Eds.) (2005), Emerging Adults in America Coming of Age in the 2lst Century (pp. 59-84). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from
Lawson, T. E. (1974, April). Gagne’s Learning Theory Applied To Technical
Instruction. Training & Development Journal, 28(4), 32–40. Retrieved from
ite=ehost-live
Lightle, K. (2011, May 1). More than just technology. Science Scope, 34(9), 6-9.
Retrieved from
Merrill, M. D. (2002, August). A pebble-in-the-pond model for instructional design.
Performance Improvement, 41(7), 41–46. Retrieved from
Merrill, M. (2007). A task-centered instructional strategy. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 40(1) 5-22. Retrieved from
site=ehost-live
Nagowah, L., & Nagowah, S. (2009). A reflection on the dominant learning
theories: behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism. International Journal
of Learning, 16(2), 279-285. Retrieved from
& site=ehost-live
Paul, R. (1985). Bloom’s taxonomy and critical thinking instruction. Educational
Leadership, 42(8), 36-39. Retrieved from
471a-afde-0c7441aeb98c%40sessionmgr12&vid=9&hid=5
Ralph W. Tyler (2004, January 1). Encyclopedia of World Biography, 15, 370-
371. Retrieved from
ollo&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w
Weinberg, D. (2009, Spring). Maria Montessori and the secret of tabula rasa.
Montessori Life, 21(2), 30-35. Retrieved from
Wilson, L. O. (2006). Beyond Bloom – A new version of the cognitive taxonomy.
Leslie Owen Wilson’s Curriculum Pages. Retrieved from
Yablonsky, L. (1960). Introduction to group dynamics. American Sociological
Review, 25(5), 788. Retrieved from
Adapting Courses Using the Principles of Course Design
The goal of adapting a course is to create a richer experience for the student and facilitator. The focus includes the following research-based guiding principles of what learning should be: collaborative and social, a journey and lifelong pursuit, active and engaging, self-responsible, content relevant, and intrinsically motivated by a sense of accomplishment (Forward Thinking, 2011, para. 11).
With this in mind, the university is transitioning its learning platform to allow facilitators to have more academic freedom in their choice of course deliverables used for formative and summative assessments, except in courses containing programmatic assessments that must not be modified or eliminated. The new platform is expected to become available later this year, creating more opportunities for engagement via an adaptive learning environment with the goal of “…empower[ing] faculty to teach in a way they feel students will benefit most. We want faculty to think about the important learning outcomes in their classrooms and find creative ways of measuring them” (Forward Thinking, 2011, para. 10). Because facilitation begins with acknowledging the established content and objectives for a given course, providing the foundation to plan instructional improvements while aligning the components of a course will support a facilitator’s transition to this platform.
All courses begin with a solid starting point of the Course Design Guide (CDG) in which the content, objectives, and assessments are established. A facilitator’s first task is to become familiar with these key components of the CDG and how they interrelate. Because facilitators will build on the established content and objectives, the alignment of course deliverables, which facilitators may now manipulate, will be essential. Alignment is defined as:
“The degree to which curriculum, instruction, textbooks and other instructional materials, assessments, teacher preparation and professional development, and systems of accountability all reflect and reinforce the educational program’s objectives and standards. The goal of alignment is to ensure that all the parts of the education system are working in concert to support student learning. The curriculum defines what is to be taught; textbooks and instructional materials contain the major lessons described in the curriculum; teacher education prepares teachers who have mastered what students are supposed to learn; professional development helps teachers extend their knowledge of the curriculum and their skill in communicating lessons to students; and assessments gauge what students were taught” (Ravitch, 2007, p. 17).
The Week Two Adapting Courses exercise asks you to review each objective and the content provided, select an assignment that aligns with these materials, and provide feedback on your thought process regarding the choice of deliverable. Bloom’s verb wheel, reviewed in the learning theories is championed by the educational community as a practical and measureable way to match assessments to objectives. Bloom’s theory suggests that learning progresses from cognitive to affective to psychomotor, a hierarchical approach in which pre-requisites are necessary to move to the next level. This suggests a holistic approach to educational learning. Following this concept, questions to consider when making your selections on assessment or deliverable modifications include the following:
• Does the content provide the user adequate information to perform the objective?
• Is the assessment adaptation aligned with the content and objective?
• Does the rigor of the assessment match the verb used in the objective?
Bloom’s Taxonomy Breakdown (Original, Revised, and Digital*)
|Type and Level of Learning (Original & |Description of Cognitive Processes |Measurable Verbs for Cognitive Processes |
|Revised) | | |
|Level One: Knowledge or Remembering |Remembering previously learned material, |Original/Revised: Define, describe, draw, identify, list, label, match, name, |
| |including facts, vocabulary, concepts, and |outline, point, read, recall, recite, recognize, record, repeat, select, state,|
| |principles |reproduce, write, locate, memorize, review, and count. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Retrieving, finding, Bullet pointing, highlighting, |
| | |bookmarking, social networking, social bookmarking, favouriting/local |
| | |bookmarking, searching, and Googling. |
|Level Two: Comprehension or |Grasping the meaning of material |Original/Revised: Level One verbs plus associate, compute, convert, defend, |
|Understanding | |discuss, distinguish, explain, generalize, infer, paraphrase, predict, rewrite,|
| | |summarize, review, estimate, extend, translate, give, compare, describe, |
| | |differentiate, illustrate, reorder, and rephrase. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Advanced and Boolean searching, blog journaling, categorizing|
| | |and tagging, commenting and annotating, and subscribing. |
|Level Three: Application or Applying |Using abstractions, rules, principles, |Original/Revised: Add, apply, shop, calculate, change, modify, classify, |
| |ideas, and other information in concrete |complete, sketch, compute, demonstrate, manipulate, discover, divide, |
| |situations |construct, examine, graph, record, interpret, multiply, illustrate, operate, |
| | |prepare, choose, produce, show, predict, solve, subtract, translate, use, |
| | |dramatize, and schedule. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Running and operating, playing, uploading and sharing, and |
| | |hacking and editing. |
|Level Four: Analysis or Analyzing |Breaking down material into its constituent|Original/Revised: Distinguish, analyze, differentiate, appraise, calculate, |
| |elements or parts |experiment, test, compare, contrast, criticize, diagram, inspect, debate, |
| | |inventory, question, relate, utilize, infer, outline, discriminate, dissect, |
| | |inquire, separate, categorize, order, classify, summarize, arrange, conclude, |
| | |deduce, determine, solve, use, and utilize. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Mashing, linking, reverse-engineering, and cracking. |
|Level Five: Synthesis or Evaluating |Combining elements, pieces, or parts to |Original: Categorize, combine, propose, derive, formulate, design, imagine, |
| |form a whole or constitute a new pattern or|compose, invent, create, infer, estimate, predict, originate, construct, draw, |
| |structure |group, integrate, order, organize, plan, prepare, prescribe, produce, |
| | |transform, relate, specify, and synthesize. |
| | |Revised: Appraise, compare, contrast, revise, score, estimate, justify, rate, |
| | |test, judge, conclude, value, critique, select, measure, rank, support, choose,|
| | |hypothesize, decide, evaluate, dispute, verify, grade, assess, argue, and |
| | |determine. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Blog/vlog commenting and reflecting, posting, moderating, |
| | |collaborating and networking, testing (alpha and beta), and validating. |
|Level Six: Evaluation or Creating |Making judgments about the extent to which |Original: Appraise, compare, contrast, revise, score, estimate, justify, rate, |
| |methods or materials satisfy extant |test, judge, conclude, value, critique, select, measure, rank, support, choose,|
| |criteria |hypothesize, decide, evaluate, dispute, verify, grade, assess, argue, and |
| | |determine. |
| | |Revised: Categorize, combine, propose, derive, formulate, design, imagine, |
| | |compose, invent, create, infer, estimate, predict, originate, construct, draw, |
| | |group, integrate, order, organize, plan, prepare, prescribe, produce, |
| | |transform, relate, specify, and synthesize. |
| | |Digital Taxonomy: Programming, filming, animating, videocasting, podcasting, |
| | |mixing and remixing, directing and producing, publishing, video blogging, |
| | |blogging, wiki-ing, building Mash-ups. |
* Digital Taxonomy adapted from Lightle (2011) reference to Churches (2008) article.
Digital tools can fit into various learning levels in the taxonomy based on how they are used. The following are examples from Kathy Shrock’s Bloomin’Apps list that are free or have a free version and were highlighted in Lightle (2001, pp. 7-9):
Remembering and Understanding: Social bookmarking allows for students to comment and tag their resources in order to construct the meaning of the resource and understand it. This helps students comprehend, condense, and catalog the unlimited amount of information to which they have access versus just saving a website. In addition, it helps in recalling this vast amount of information efficiently and effectively. Diigo () is a great tool for social bookmarking, highlighting, sticky notes, etc, that will help organize Internet use. A toolbar is downloaded to your browser to add web addresses, titles, descriptions, and tags by simply clicking on the bookmark button. You can share these with students, colleagues or with an educator account - classes, by merely adding a website; no email addresses are required. Since Diigo is web-based, you can access these links from any computer or iPhone/Android with Internet connection.
Applying: PowerPoint, Skype, Google Apps, iPhoto, iMovie, and Flickr all allow for “doing” at this cognitive level. () and Glogster () are two that are newer to the market. MakeBeliefsComix has no registration requirement and permits users to create a comic strip with available characters and ability to add speech and/or thought bubbles to each frame. Golgster is very visual letting users design posters with optional background, color, font that pops out, pictures, music, and videos; allowing for varied multimedia.
Analyzing: Prezi () and Wordle () will help learners make connections, analyze, and present information in distinctive visual ways. Prezi is a free, web-based application, expanding presentations with zooming, digital presentation editor, and videos, etc. without requiring Flash, and can be used to create a visual organizer. Wordle allows for the generation of “word clouds’ from user provided text. The clouds give greater prominence to words based on the number of times they appear in the text, i.e., the more often they appear, the more prominence is given. Clouds can have various fonts, layouts, and color schemes and can be saved to the gallery and shared with classmates.
Evaluating: VoiceThread () and Blogs stimulate judgments, validations, and reflections at this level. VoiceThread is a collaborative slide show application that holds images, documents, and videos; it allows others to navigate the slides and leave comments using voice, text, audio file, or video. It is a great asynchronous tool to discuss topics. Blogs () are sharing sites (private and public) to communicate with colleagues and students via postings.
Creating: There are a plethora of technological options to support this level of cognitive process for an authentic learning experience such as programming with Scratch or Storytelling Alice, film production, animations, digital stories, and publish media and text. Scratch () allows the user to easily create interactive games, art, stories, and music. This stimulates creative thought, systematic reasoning and collaborative work when shared. 3-D animated movies can be created at Storytelling Alice (kelleher/storytelling/#). Animoto () allows video creation and editing. Users can create video slide shows with music.
Academic rigor, as defined by Martone & Sireci (2009), suggests a symbiotic mutualism relationship between instructional alignment and objectives, activities, and deliverables. See Chart 1 on the following page to view a sample alignment of objectives, content, and assignments, for a general management course.
Chart 1
|Objective |Content |Assignment |
|Differentiate between management and |Management: Leading and Collaborating in a|Deliverable Type: Small Group Activity* |
|leadership. |Competitive World |Divide the class into small groups. Allow each group approximately 15 minutes |
| | |to prepare a want ad for the ideal leader. Have groups use the following |
| | |questions to develop their ads: |
| | |What are the overall duties and responsibilities the ideal leader is expected |
| | |to perform? |
| | |What skills and characteristics should the ideal leader possess? |
| | |What experience and education should the ideal leader possess? |
| | |What rewards, including non-monetary rewards, will the ideal leader receive for|
| | |successfully performing his or her duties? |
| | |Instruct each group to write their want ads on the whiteboard or flipchart. |
| | |Then, have each group select a spokesperson to read his or her group's ad and |
| | |explain why the group included the elements they did. After each group has made|
| | |their presentation, review the ads for common elements and come up with a list |
| | |of the most critical elements for effective leadership. Ask them to circle the |
| | |elements that differentiate leadership from management. |
| | |*This activity can be adapted to Online classes by having students discuss the |
| | |questions in written form and eliminating the flip chart, whiteboard, and time |
| | |requirements. |
|Examine the role and responsibilities |Management: Leading and Collaborating in a|Deliverable Type: DQ or Discussion Prompts* |
|of leaders in creating and maintaining |Competitive World |Ask students to answer the following questions in 10 minutes or less: |
|a healthy organizational culture. | |If you were the chief executive officer of an organization and wanted to change|
| | |the organizational culture from being product-focused to customer-focused, how |
| | |would you accomplish that objective? |
| | |How do you think leaders affect organizational cultures? |
| | |What internal factors do you think create the greatest challenges for leaders? |
| | |What external factors do you think create the greatest challenges for leaders? |
| | |How do internal and external factors affect organizational cultures? |
| | |Then, facilitate a class discussion in which everyone has an opportunity to |
| | |share his or her thoughts and ideas. Ask the class to summarize what they |
| | |learned about how leaders create and maintain a healthy organizational culture.|
| | |*This activity can be adapted to Online classes by having students discuss the |
| | |material in written form and eliminating the time requirements. |
|Evaluate the impact of globalization |EBOOK: Management: Leading and |Deliverable Type: Small Group Activity( |
|and management across borders. |Collaborating in a Competitive World |Divide the class into two groups. Have one group discuss how the skills needed |
| | |for a manager in one country may be different in another country. Have the |
| | |other group discuss cultural and ethical issues involved with international |
| | |management. Have a spokesperson from each group share their findings with the |
| | |class in 5 minutes or less explaining their cultural and ethical issue |
| | |evaluation and the techniques used to evaluate the criteria. Afterward, |
| | |facilitate a discussion on how globalization has impacted management. |
| | |(This activity can be adapted to online classes by eliminating the time limits |
| | |on each phase of the activity and having the students respond in written |
| | |format. |
In reviewing the example in Chart 1, we can use the proposed questions to evaluate alignment.
Objective One: Differentiate between management and leadership.
• Does the content provide the user adequate information to perform the objective? Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World provides specifics and clarity on the ideal manager and leader, so the answer would be, “Yes.”
• Is the assessment adaptation aligned with the content and objective? Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World and the first objective are aligned with the current assessment of a small group activity in which a want ad for the ideal leader is designed.
There are numerous ways to create and establish learning. The new interface, inspired by flexibility, will offer a library of optional assignments, allow faculty to create a specific assignment they prefer, or allow the student to select their deliverable for this objective. How would you replace a preordained assessment? The adaptation might include the following choices:
o A team presentation on the traits of an ideal leader
o A pro and con chart of the qualities of a manager and a leader
o A debate with one side for leadership and the other side for management
o A discussion question on the definition of a manager
o A paper on the ideal leader
o A skit on the perfect manager
o A collage of ideal leadership features
o A mix-and-match simulation on the attributes of a leader
o A mind map of an ideal manger with spokes of characteristics
o A pop quiz on leadership qualities
Comparing the original assessment of the want ad to the given choices, you can see that the choices align with the content and objective. This would lead us to our final comparison of the assessment rigor and the objective verb.
• Does the rigor of the assessment match the verb used in the objective?
The verb in the first objective is, “Differentiate,” which falls into Bloom’s Taxonomy Verb Wheel Analysis, as seen in the Week Two Reading: Advocating Student Learning by Adapting Courses. The rigor would be breaking the topic into parts to distinguish relationships and classify the information. The small group activity does break the topic into parts the different requirements of an ideal leader and does distinguish relationships and classify the material. The answer to this question would be, “Yes.”
What about the various suggested alternative deliverables for this objective? Does the verb on Bloom’s verb wheel match the adaptation choices?
Chart 2
|Verb |Rigor |Adaptation |Match? |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A team presentation on the traits of an|Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information |ideal leader |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A pro and con chart of the qualities of|Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information |a manager versus a leader |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A debate with one side for leadership |Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information |and the other side for management |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A discussion question on the definition|No, it does not break the topic into parts, |
| |relationships; classify information |of a manager |distinguish relationships, or classify the material. |
| | | |It neglects the leadership aspect |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A paper on the ideal leader |Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information | |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A skit on the perfect manager |No, it does not break the topic into parts, |
| |relationships; classify information | |distinguish relationships, or classify the material. |
| | | |It neglects the leadership aspect. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A collage of the ideal leadership |Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information |features |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A mix-and-match simulation on the |No, it does not break the topic into parts, |
| |relationships; classify information |attributes of a leader |distinguish relationships, or classify the material. |
| | | |It neglects the establishing relationships. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A mind map of an ideal manger with |Yes, it breaks the topic into parts, distinguishes |
| |relationships; classify information |spokes of characteristics |relationships, and classifies the material. |
|Differentiate |Break topic down; establish |A pop quiz on leadership qualities |No, it does not break the topic into parts, |
| |relationships; classify information | |distinguish relationships, or classify the material. |
| | | |It neglects the establishing relationships. |
We can see from the “Match?” column in Chart 2 that rigor can be the determining factor of whether or not the adaptation choice is equivalent to the suggested deliverable. Each deliverable addresses all or some of the objectives for students to achieve, but in a unique way using different skills and technologies. Petersen and Cruz's research (2004) suggests that students learn more when content, objectives, and assessments are in alignment. Let’s take a look at the second objective in Chart 1.
Objective Two: Examine the role and responsibilities of leaders in creating and maintaining a healthy organizational culture.
• Does the content give the user adequate information to perform the objective? Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World supplies talking points on the role and responsibilities of leaders in creating and maintaining a healthy organizational culture. Based on this fact, the answer to this question would be, “Yes.”
• Is the assessment adaptation aligned with the content and objective? Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World and the second objective are aligned with the current assessment of a discussion question or prompt in which students answer various questions relative to leadership and the relationship to a healthy organizational culture.
As mentioned, there is a plethora of concept deliverables to establish learning and faculty are supported in selecting their favored type of deliverable. Electing a substitute might come in the following proposals:
o A paper on the components of a healthy organizational culture
o A skit on organizational culture
o A collage reflecting the relationship between leadership and a healthy organizational culture
o A mix-and-match simulation on the elements of a healthy organizational culture
o A mind map showing the characteristics of a healthy organizational culture stemming from effective leadership
o A pop quiz on healthy organizational culture qualities
o A team presentation on the relationship between leadership and a healthy organizational culture
o A debate on organizational culture
o A discussion question on the definition of organizational culture
Comparing the original assessment of the discussion question or prompt to the given choices, you can see that all the choices do appear to align with the content and objective. This would lead us to our final evaluation of the assessment rigor and the objective verb.
• Does the rigor of the assessment match the verb used in the objective?
With Objective Two, the verb is, “Examine.” As with Objective One, this falls into Bloom’s Taxonomy Verb Wheel Analysis portion and would have the same rigor as Objective One. The deliverable is a discussion question or prompt in which students answer various questions relative to the leadership topic, breaking it down and differentiating relationships while categorizing subject matter. The assessment is equivalent to the verb, so the answer to this question would be, “Yes.”
What about the suggested alternative deliverable for this objective? Does the verb match the adaptation choices?
Chart 3
|Verb |Rigor |Adaptation |Match? |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A paper on the components of a healthy |Yes, it asks students to make plain or clear, |
| |detail |organizational culture |to make known in detail |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A skit on organizational culture |No, it does not ask students to make plain or |
| |detail | |clear, to make known in detail |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A collage reflecting the relationship |No, it does not ask students to make plain or |
| |detail |between leadership and a healthy |clear, to make known in detail |
| | |organizational culture | |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A mind map showing the characteristics of a |Yes, it asks students to make plain or clear, |
| |detail |healthy organizational culture stemming from|to make known in detail |
| | |effective leadership | |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A pop quiz on healthy organizational culture|No, it does not ask students to make plain or |
| |detail |qualities |clear, to make known in detail |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A team presentation on the relationship |Yes, it asks students to make plain or clear, |
| |detail |between leadership and a healthy |to make known in detail |
| | |organization culture | |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A debate on organizational culture |Yes, it asks students to make plain or clear, |
| |detail | |to make known in detail |
|Explain |To make plain or clear, to make known in |A discussion question on the definition of |Yes, it asks students to make plain or clear, |
| |detail |organizational culture |to make known in detail |
Again, we can observe from the “Match?” column in Chart 3 that rigor is the determining factor of whether or not the adaptation choice is equivalent to the suggested deliverable. Once more, the flexibility of choice allows students to achieve the stated outcomes using varied technologies and skills. Let’s take a look at the third objective in Chart 1.
Objective Three: Evaluate the effect of globalization and management across borders.
• Does the content provide the user adequate information to perform the objective? Because details on evaluating the effect of globalization and management across borders are presented in Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World, the response to this question is, “Yes.”
• Is the assessment adaptation aligned with the content and objective? The third objective and Management: Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive World are aligned with the suggested deliverable of a small group activity to compare and contrast manager requirements in different countries along with cultural and ethical issues involved in international management.
As previously established, faculty may design or select a different deliverable other than the one outlined in the CDG, or provide the students with the ability to choose from an array of options. A change in deliverables might include one or more of the following:
o A class debate on global management
o A discussion question on the definition of a global manager
o A mix-and-match simulation on global management requirements
o A team presentation contrasting manager requirements in different countries, focusing on the cultural and ethical issues involved
o A pro and con chart on global management
o A paper contrasting the manager requirements in different countries focusing on the cultural and ethical issues involved
o A skit on a management issue arising from global management
o A collage of the global management features
o A pop quiz on global management requirements
o A mind map of global management issues relative to culture and ethics
Comparing the original assessment of the discussion question or prompt to the given choices, you can see that all the choices do appear to align with the content and objective. The final judgment in the process is to compare the rigor and the objective verb.
• Does the rigor of the assessment match the verb used in the objective?
Objective Three’s verb is, “Evaluate.” This falls into the Evaluation sector of Bloom’s Verb Wheel. The rigor for this verb comprises judging the value and purpose of the topic and supporting this judgment with relevant criteria. The small group activity of comparing and contrasting the manager requirements in different countries along with cultural and ethical issues involved in international management does fit the rigor of judging. The support section is implemented during the team presentations of their findings and in the final group discussion. The answer to this question would be, “Yes.”
What about the suggested alternative deliverable for this objective? Does the verb match the adaptation choices?
Chart 4
|Verb |Rigor |Adaptation |Match? |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A class debate on the purposes of global |Yes, it judges value and purpose, while |
| |relevant criteria. |management |supporting the judgment with relevant criteria.|
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A discussion question on the definition of |No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. |a global manager |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A drag and drop multimedia on global |No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. |management requirements |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A team presentation evaluating manager |Yes, it judges value and purpose, while |
| |relevant criteria. |requirements in different countries |supporting the judgment with relevant criteria.|
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A chart on global management |No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. | |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A paper judging the value of certain |Yes, it judges value and purpose, while |
| |relevant criteria. |leadership skills |supporting the judgment with relevant criteria.|
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A skit on a management issue arising from |No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. |global management |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A collage of the global management features|No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. | |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A pop quiz on global management |No, it lacks judgment of value and purpose, |
| |relevant criteria. |requirements |while supporting the judgment with relevant |
| | | |criteria. |
|Evaluate |Judge value and purpose; support with |A mind map evaluating global management |Yes, it judges value and purpose, while |
| |relevant criteria. |issues showing relevant criteria |supporting the judgment with relevant criteria.|
Once again, rigor plays an influential role in deciphering whether or not the adaptation meets the prewritten deliverable in the CDG. Your focal points should be to check the verb at the beginning of the objective you are measuring, locate it on Bloom’s Verb Wheel, and use any verbs in the same section to guide you. Students, when working within aligned curriculum and instruction apply their knowledge, and substantiate their knowledge via cognitive training and corroboration.
In summary, new or alternate practice activities or assessments must accomplish the following: measure the objective for which they were designed; be equal in rigor, breadth, and educational value to the original; prepare students for any final assessment; and engage the student. To ensure the activities adapted or changed have similar rigor to the original, check them against a Bloom’s Verb Wheel.
References
Churches, A. (2008, April 1). Bloom’s taxonomy blooms digitally. Tech &
Learning. Retrieved from article/8670.
Forward Thinking. (2011, Spring). Faculty Matters. Retrieved from
Lightle, K. (2011, May 1). More than just technology. Science Scope, 34(9), 6-9.
Retrieved from
Martone, A., & Sereci, S. G. (2009). Evaluating alignment between curriculum,
assessment, and instruction. Review of Educational Research, 79(4),
1332–1361. doi:10.3102/0034654309341375
Petersen, S., & Cruz, L. (2004, May/June). What did we learn today? The
importance of instructional alignment. Strategies, 17(5), 33-36. Retrieved
from
12DE7C64784779BFB14/8?accountid=35812
Ravitch, D. (2007). EdSpeak: A Glossary of Education Terms, Phrases,
Buzzwords, and Jargon. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development. Retrieved from
=uphoenix&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w
Advocating Student Learning by Adapting Courses
This new adaptive learning environment was created so faculty have more flexibility, engagement, and individualization. Faculty will become acquainted with their students’ learning styles, experiences, prior knowledge, interests, goals, and possible educational gaps in their learning. Faculty may target and aid strugglers while identifying and challenging advanced pupils, individualizing the learning experiences for each student by providing more choice. Our new model is described as, “faculty-developed and centrally managed” (Forward Thinking, 2011, para. 7). Students practice and learn real-world skills because of the collaboration of those in the process.
If set at the appropriate level, education is more effective by meeting the learner's needs. Effectiveness is enhanced by attending to learner motivation, learning transfer, and participation. University of Phoenix students often say that they are able to apply at work what they learned in class. Research indicates that learning occurs when bridges are built between new knowledge and the student’s experience, making learning relevant. The following diagram shows alignment from the university’s mission to course objectives.
[pic]
To support the faculty, various tools are being developed, such as quiz and rubric generators, enhanced multimedia materials, and an assignment marketplace where faculty can find a variety of assignments for each learning goal. Faculty may provide students with choices versus in the past where it was a one-assignment-fits-all scenario.
“Where appropriate, students might choose, for example, to do video casts or PowerPoint presentations in lieu of a traditional written paper. Additionally, automated grading tools are in development that will reduce administrative duties and allow faculty to spend more time teaching” (Forward Thinking, 2011, para. 8).
As an instructional leader, using varied instructional methods to adapt centralized course curriculum can foster a climate of instruction that advocates optimal learning. The following are questions for reflection and insight regarding adapting course content and its relationship to this certification's objectives:
• How do traditional learning theories support adapting courses at University of Phoenix?
• How can the principles of course design support a facilitator’s efforts to adapt courses?
• How can facilitators use past instructional experiences to effectively adapt a course?
• How might adapting a course positively affect the student learning experience?
Reflective teaching and learning along with classroom assessment techniques are tools that will assist in this process. We will cover this in Week Three.
Reference
Forward Thinking. (2011, Spring). Faculty Matters. Retrieved from
College Guidelines for Adapting Courses
The university is focused on creating a new learning platform which will enhance the classroom experience for students and faculty. The new learning platform will allow faculty the flexibility to adapt their courses to provide a more individualized learning experience for the student and further increase the engagement of the student. In an effort to better prepare faculty for the opportunity to make adaptations, we have created a list of guidelines for adapting courses per each specific college. These guidelines can be applied to your current classes as well. Expect more news about this platform later this year.
General Guidelines
• Week One assignments cannot be modified. These assignments should be left as they are listed in the Course Design Guide.
• Faculty Notes should be reviewed for any specific details directly related to the course that can affect altering assignments.
College of Education
College of Education course assignments can be modified, as long as they meet the course objectives in the syllabus with the following exceptions:
• Assignments specifically designated for submission to TaskStream cannot be changed or deleted. These assignments will be specifically designated as e-portfolio assignments in the appropriate syllabi.
• The student teaching experience counts for 50 percent of the seminar grade; this value cannot be adjusted. Work in the seminar course should account for the remaining 50 percent of the grade. The points awarded for the midterm and final student teaching grades are based on an evaluation of site visits by the faculty supervisor. The faculty supervisor is responsible for completing the Midterm Evaluation Grade Form and the final student teaching evaluation, completed in the student’s TaskStream account. Students earning less than a B on the final evaluation will automatically earn 0 points for the seminar.
Colleges of Humanities and Natural Sciences
Most Colleges of Humanities and Natural Sciences courses are designed for an efficient mix of Learning Team and individual assignments. As long as all objectives and goals are met, faculty may modify some assignments. A facilitator might create a larger assignment out of two smaller ones, for example. When combining or altering assignments, ensure that course rigor is maintained and objectives are assessed. The following checklist is provided to assist with that goal:
• Assignments are appropriate for the objectives:
o Discuss or describe objectives that are well suited to discussion questions or written assignments.
o Explain objectives that are well suited to written assignments.
o Use or apply objectives that are well suited to projects.
• The course rigor remains intact.
• The workload of any week is not overwhelming in terms of rigor or time needed for completion.
• The information students need to complete assignments is taught prior to the assignment; for example, an assignment based on Week Four readings must not be assigned prior to Week Four.
• An approximate 70/30 grade weighting ratio is maintained for individual and Learning Team assignments, respectively.
School of Business
Assignments for the School of Business may be modified, with the exception of Week One and programmatic assessment assignments, which capture important data regarding student progress. Assignments used for programmatic assessments change from time to time, as the college measures learning outcomes. Check the current Course Design Guide each time you facilitate a course to determine if assignments fall into this category. Course curriculum changes are listed on a bimonthly basis in the Online GBAM and UBAM Faculty Forums, in the Priority Implementation thread.
When altering assignments, ensure that course rigor is maintained and objectives are assessed. Consider the following examples of ways assignments may be modified:
• Combining two assignments into one if skills are closely related
• Selecting an assignment portion that correlates with objectives
• Altering the week in which an assignment is due
• Eliminating an assignment if a skill is repeated in another assignment, unless you feel students need multiple opportunities to practice the skill
• Rewriting discussion questions to more closely align to weekly objectives
• Standardizing the number of discussion questions: Two to three per week is recommended; however, there should be no fewer than two
• Assigning a Learning Team project in increments: Each week, the Learning Team completes a portion of the project. Per policy, there should be a learning team deliverable in all weeks, other than Week One. The design and point value of these deliverables is up to the facilitator.
College of Information Systems & Technology
College of Information Systems & Technology (IS&T) course assignments can be modified, as long as they meet the course objectives in the syllabus with the following exceptions:
• Assignments specifically designated as programmatic assessments cannot be changed or deleted. These assignments are used to help measure student mastery of specific concepts to provide documentation for systematic reviews and accreditation programs.
• The overall point percentages must still meet the 70/30 (individual/team) split and adequate written assignments may not be substituted for quizzes in excess of 10% of the overall points.
For core courses in which there is an electronically administered final exam, the exam must be worth 15% of the total grade. This assignment cannot be altered in the syllabus.
Check your modifications to ensure that course objectives are met and instructional quality is maintained. Use the following checklist:
• All course objectives are met.
• Assignments are appropriate for objectives:
o Discuss or describe objectives that are well suited to discussion questions or assignments.
o Explain objectives that are well suited to assignments.
o Use or apply objectives that are well suited to projects.
• The course rigor remains intact.
• The workload is not overwhelming in terms of rigor or time needed for completion.
• The information students need to complete assignments is taught prior to the assignment; for example, an assignment based on Week Four readings must not be assigned prior to Week Four.
• Follow the ratio of individual and Learning Team assignments presented in the Course Design Guide. Courses should follow a 70/30 split (individual/team).
Associates – First-Year Sequence
Faculty may change assignments with a few exceptions. Keep in mind that the university’s Instructional Design and Development staff have designed the First-Year Sequence courses carefully to maximize opportunities for students to achieve success in their first year in the associates program.
If you make changes to the Course Design Guide, here are the main points to keep in mind:
• The modified assignments must maintain a focus on the week’s learning objectives, and provide an equivalent level of academic rigor.
• The curriculum in some courses is designed so assignments build on one another. In some cases, assignments may be directly connected. If you modify one assignment, consider the long-term effects and make sure that subsequent assignments will not be confusing for students.
If, at any time, you have questions regarding the curriculum or related modifications, contact the following sources:
University of Phoenix, Online
• Faculty content area discussion forums
• Full-Time Development Faculty Team at facultyassist@phoenix.edu
School of Advanced Studies
• Faculty content area discussion forums
• Full-Time Development Faculty Team at sasisteam@phoenix.edu
Local Campuses
• Director of Academic Affairs
• Campus College Chair
• Area Chair
Week Three Readings
Welcome to Week Three of Advanced Faculty Certification! This week’s readings focus on enhancing student learning through formative assessment techniques and metacognitive strategies. To do this, faculty must be engaged and be better acquainted with students. By creating a learner-centered environment, faculty provide a better overall educational experience for students. Part of the students’ learning process is reflecting on their ideas and perspectives on the topics discussed each week and by more closely analyzing the work they submit. Faculty can help create a stronger learner-centered environment for students by focusing on using formative assessment techniques and metacognitive strategies aimed at better recognition of the areas where students are doing well and where they need to work harder to understand the concepts.
Questions for Reflection
• Do you think you are creating a learner-centered environment in your classes?
• How will you use metacognitive strategies to enhance learning in your courses?
• Do you feel you are consistent in using formative assessment techniques in your courses?
Looking at the readings this week, hopefully, you will see a few ways to enhance the learning environment for your students.
Learner-Centered Environment
Faculty members at University of Phoenix understand the key role the university’s mission plays in successful student outcomes. The mission of University of Phoenix is to provide access to higher education opportunities that enable students to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to achieve their professional goals, improve the productivity of their organizations, and provide leadership and service to their communities.
Beyond the mission, the academic vision of the university centers on students as learners and focuses on the effect the university has on students’ lives. University of Phoenix is a student-centered learning environment.
The primary measure of fulfilling of the university’s mission and vision is the degree to which students learn. Learning may occur without teaching, but a teacher’s principal motive is to facilitate learning. Teaching, however, is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for learning.
• Learning occurs outside the classroom without a teacher.
• Teaching does not automatically produce the desired learning results.
• The best teaching is the result of a reflective cognitive process.
Considering that learning is the purpose of education, it is important to remember that traditional higher education pedagogy assumes that teaching is important. This belief is based on a faulty assumption that learning is a natural result of teaching.
Faculty plays an integral role in supporting the university’s mission and vision. The focus for a faculty member is on creating a learner-centered environment in which, according to Huba and Freed (2000), the following occurs:
• There is a shift from “How will I teach this?” to “How will students learn this?”
• Students construct knowledge through gathering and synthesizing information
• Students are actively involved
• Emphasis is placed on using and communicating knowledge in real-life context
• A faculty member guides and facilitates
• The culture is cooperative, collaborative, and supportive
• The focus is placed on the faculty member and students learning together.
How does one create a learner-centered environment that meets the adult learner's needs in the online classroom? Some techniques for fulfilling these specific needs include the following:
• Establish adult-to-adult rapport.
o Share your biographical information, including appropriate personal experiences.
o Monitor your tone to demonstrate respect at all times.
o Address all learners as equals; eliminate bias in your communications.
o Use appropriate examples of your experience in your course materials and during discussions.
o Be approachable and accessible.
o Create a participatory environment.
• Facilitate thought-provoking discussion questions,
o Engage actively in discussions and ask follow-up questions.
o Encourage learners to relate theory to their life experiences, even if that request fosters disagreement.
• Facilitate adult independence,
o Provide clear instructions for all assignments.
o Provide prompt feedback so the learner can understand deficiencies and make appropriate corrections.
o Provide assignment grading criteria in advance.
To achieve a learner-centered environment, faculty members must respond to the following questions as they facilitate student learning in the classroom:
• Do students know what they should?
• Can students do what they should be able to?
• Have students more fully developed values appropriate to their professions?
• Are students achieving their life and career goals?
• How do I know that students know what they should?
Wrap-Up
Creating an engaging learner-centered environment is at the heart of the university’s mission and vision. Creating a learner-centered environment at University of Phoenix does not happen by accident; it requires a knowledgeable and trained faculty member. Keeping the university’s mission statement and vision in the forefront of your practice, combined with the five key questions, is necessary to ensure that student learning is the focus of your efforts.
Reference
Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college
campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Needham, MA: Allyn &Bacon. Retrieved from salsa.files/perlas/AssessmentPlanHandouts.doc
Metacognition
“Cognition is the mental process of knowing, including awareness, perception, reasoning, and judgment” (Smith, 2008, p. 5). “Metacognition is a cognitive theory defined as a learner's awareness of his or her own learning process” (Smith, 2008, p. 1). Promoting awareness of learning helps to develop the adult-to-adult rapport, engagement, and independence that contribute to a learner-centered environment. “A person who is metacognitive knows how to learn because he/she is aware of what he/she knows and what he/she must do in order to gain new knowledge” (Wilson, 2010, p. 270). Faculty may use the principles of metacognition and metacognitive strategies to engage students in critical thinking and helping them to draw conclusions about their own learning.
Developing Metacognitive Skills
Metacognitive skills can be developed in many ways in University of Phoenix classrooms. Weimer (2010, para. 3) provides the following suggestions as techniques faculty can use to help support students in the development of metacognitive skills.
Assess the Task – provide students precise directions so they are clear on their on their objectives. Be more specific than you feel necessary avoiding the assumption that basic explanations are sufficient. Evaluate the Ability to Complete the Task – offer periodic self-assessments, especially early on in the class, so students are able to appraise the tools they have to complete each assignment. Facilitate the reasoning behind these assessments.
Plan the Approach to the Task – aid learners in providing an assignment implementation plan that allows for changes to fit their learning style. This should be the main focal point of the task with included time and associated points.
Apply Strategies and Evaluate Progress – assist students with application of their selected strategies and assign self-assessments for monitoring their progress. Utilize reflection and peer review as part of the assignment directions to help students think critically about what they are accomplishing and why, along with being realistic regarding their progress.
Adjust Strategies – encourage students to adjust their tactics where appropriate by analyzing their effectiveness with reflection during and after completion of the project. Facilitate different ways to tackle a task. All of the aforementioned techniques can be outlined in the initial syllabus with more constructive details designed for classroom interaction.
Metacognitive Facilitation Strategies
Providing more constructivist facilitation can enhance the use of metacognition by students. The following offers various ideas to include within your facilitation to stimulate this use of metacognition:
Case Studies - facilitators “provide students with an avenue for real-life experiences as they use problem solving strategies to engage in questioning and monitoring their own approaches and learning” (Smith, 2008, p. 3).
Think-Alouds – facilitators “provide a model of how readers monitor, recall, and question what they just read” (Smith, 2008, p. 3).
Modeling – facilitators “model how they think. In questioning, as teachers ask questions and then explain how to answer them, sharing the thinking process and not necessarily the answers” (Duplass as cited in Smith, 2008, p. 3).
Wrappers - facilitators create activities that encourage metacognition that surround existing course deliverables. Wrappers require time, but the impact is immeasurable. Their effectiveness revolves around integrating metacognitive behavior as needed and students getting “immediate feedback on the accuracy of their perceptions, thus alleviating the problem of over confidence” (Ormond, 2012, para. 7).
Individual Learning Plan (ILP) – facilitators support learning efforts by “setting ILP goals, developing an ILP, monitoring the learning process, writing a reflective journal, conducting one-on-one conferences, and making summative evaluations” (Chiang as cited in Peirce, 2003, para. 17).
Self-Assessment of a Research Paper – facilitators direct students to “…write a reflective, self-assessment of your research process for this assignment. At which steps in the process were you most satisfied with how you worked? When were you least satisfied? What skills do you feel you improved? In what ways do you feel more capable? What were the chief obstacles to being efficient? What will you do differently next time? (Peirce, 2003, para. 20)
When considering your next teaching assignment, reflect on the following:
various strategies you could employ in your initial outline of your class assignments; follow this up with actual classroom activities based on your modality to enhance metacognition in your students.
References
Ormond, C. (2012). Teaching metacognition. On the Cutting Edge – Professional
Development for Geoscience Faculty. Retrieved on April 2, 2012, from:
Pierce, W. (2003). Metacognition: Study strategies, monitoring, and motivation.
Retrieved on April 2, 2012, from
Smith, T. (2008). Metacognition. Metacognition -- Research Starters Education,
1-9. Retreived from
Weimer, M. (2010, August 11). Metacognitive skills for self-directed learners. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from
Wilson, N. S., & Bai, H. (2010). The relationships and impact of teachers'
metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition. Metacognition & Learning, 5(3), 269-288. doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9062-4
The Role of Classroom Assessment
Learning is the purpose of education. Students begin a course knowing some things, desiring to learn more. Courses are designed with specific objectives identified as the focus of the content, activities, and assignments. Classroom assessment is one of three levels of assessment; the others are program and institutional assessments (Stiggins & DuFour, 2009).
Classroom assessment processes provide insight regarding the size and nature of the gap between what has been learned and what remains to be learned. There are two categories of classroom assessment processes and techniques: summative and formative assessment.
A summative assessment is a summary of learning that has taken place. Quizzes, tests, and other graded assignments are categorized as summative assessments. Graded assignments provide information about what the student has learned and what the student has not yet learned at the end of a lesson, course, or program.
Formative assessments may or may not be graded, and primarily provide the teacher and student with information about what has been learned and what remains to be learned. Formative assessments are not used at the end of a lesson or a course; they are used midlesson or midcourse as one factor influencing the teaching and learning strategies that will be used next. Formative assessments influence future classroom activities, discussions, and readings so learning continues. With formative assessments, misunderstandings may be corrected, and gaps in knowledge may be filled before a class week, workshop, or course ends and summative assessments occur. Formative assessments have many forms, such as interactive discussions following brief lectures, ungraded pop quizzes during class, informal feedback from students about points or concepts that are not clear before each class session ends, or a one-sentence summary of a key point from the readings for the week written by students during the class meeting. [Harlan] (as cited in Smith, 2008, p. 4) states that “formative assessment is important in improving learners' metacognition because this form of feedback engages learners in thinking about their learning and progress.”
Formative assessments often take little time to complete, but they yield valuable input about which course concepts have been mastered and which concepts must be covered in more detail. In a writing course, for example, students might be provided 10 sample sentences with writing errors to correct. In the on-campus environment, the samples could be reviewed and discussed during the class session, so immediate feedback could be provided as students compare their answers to the correct answers. In the asynchronous online environment, the same activity could form the basis of a discussion question or similar activity posed to elicit answers and inquiries, if necessary, into the basis for the answers. Angelo and Cross (1993) provide several examples of formative assessment techniques in the Formative Classroom Assessment Techniques table.
Formative Classroom Assessment Techniques table
|Formative Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs)* |
|Assessing prior knowledge and skills |
|Background Knowledge Probe |This CAT consists of providing students a brief questionnaire where they are asked to answer basic questions about a |
| |topic. The goal is to get an overview of where students’ skill levels are so you know at what level to begin teaching |
| |about the topic (Angelo & Cross, 1993, p. 121). |
|Focused Listing |This CAT narrows to a specific concept or term from a lesson the focus point. According to Angelo and Cross (1993, p. |
| |126), you ask students to, “…list several ideas that are closely related to that ‘focus point’.” This technique can be |
| |used before, during, or after the lesson. Focused listing can be used before the lesson to decide at what level to start |
| |teaching. The technique can be used during the lesson to assess how the students are grasping the material as it is being|
| |presented. Finally, the assessment can be used after the lesson is complete to assess how students understood the |
| |material (Angelo & Cross, 1993). |
|Misconception/ Preconception Check |This CAT is similar to the previous two in that the goal is to assess what a student may already know about a topic. With|
| |this CAT, Angelo and Cross (1993, p.132) state, the goal is to, “...uncover...prior knowledge or beliefs that may hinder |
| |or block further learning.” This is helpful for classes where controversial or sensitive issues will be discussed and |
| |analyzed (Angelo & Cross, 1993). |
|Empty Outlines |The goal of this CAT is to find out what the student learned after a lesson or assignment is completed. The facilitator |
| |provides a partially finished outline and students must fill in the blanks. This assessment works particularly well for |
| |lessons focused on content-facts and principles where there are clear-cut answers (Angelo & Cross, 1993). |
|Memory Matrix |This CAT is designed as a diagram for students to complete. Angelo and Cross (1993, p. 142) state, “The Memory Matrix is |
| |simply a two-dimensional diagram, a rectangle divided into rows and columns used to organize information and illustrate |
| |relationships’.” The facilitator provides the headings, but students must fill in the blank cells. This is an effective |
| |assessment for lessons that categorize information where student recall of specific details is important (Angelo & Cross,|
| |1993). |
|Minute Paper |This CAT is designed for the physical classroom, but could be adapted for the online environment. The goal is for |
| |students to quickly respond to one or two questions, such as “’What was the most important thing you learning during the |
| |class?’” or “’What important question remains unanswered?’” (Angelo & Cross, 1993, p. 149). |
|Muddiest Point |This CAT is designed to narrow in on the specific areas students want to review further. Ask questions such as, “’What |
| |was the muddiest point in___?’”. The facilitator knows specific topics to discuss in further detail (Angelo & Cross, |
| |1993, p. 154). |
|*There are many other assessment techniques in Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. Participants may choose any assessment techniques |
|listed in the reading for the Week 3 Exercise - Classroom Assessment Plan. |
|Reference |
|Angelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from |
| |
The details for each assessment technique are in Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers (Angelo & Cross, 1993), available through the materials for this session.
References
Angelo, T. K., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A
handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from
Smith, T. (2008). Metacognition. Metacognition -- Research Starters Education,
1-9. Retreived from
Stiggins, R. & DuFour, R. (2009, May). Maximizing the power of formative
assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 640–644. Retrieved from
Week Four Readings
Welcome to Week Four of Advanced Faculty Certification! This week’s readings primarily focus on the Classroom Management Tool (CMT) and Socratic Questioning techniques for use in discussion and feedback.
Background of the CMT
The CMT was developed in 2009 as part of a university-wide shift in the philosophical approach to faculty coaching. A committee was formed to investigate and ground our faculty coaching strategies in findings from past and current academic research. Through extensive research, two broad areas of coaching were identified: compliance-related and assessment or learning feedback-related. The consensus of the committee was that a qualitative-based approach, versus one focused on quantitative measures, was in the best interest of faculty, students, and the university.
The result of the committee’s efforts was the development of a qualitative rubric instrument named the CMT. There are three primary purposes of the CMT. First, this document serves as an expectation guideline for faculty participation and assignment feedback in UOPX classrooms. Second, it was designed to be a faculty self-assessment tool for continual improvement. Third, it was established for evaluating faculty performance. Administration utilizes this tool in a collaborative manner to ensure that facilitation requirements, including substantive faculty participation and feedback expectations are being met. Part of the coaching and collaboration process revolves around the CMT, whereby faculty are encouraged to engage in self-reflection.
The CMT is shared on eCampus and at local campuses, so faculty members are aware of facilitator expectations. By aligning current practices and tools across colleges and campuses, an environment of consistency has been developed that further supports the collaborative coaching role of faculty administration.
Description of the Classroom Management Tool (CMT)
The CMT has been created to ensure that facilitation requirements and substantive faculty participation and feedback are met in the classroom. Additionally, the CMT allows faculty to conduct an honest evaluation of their participation and feedback performance in a reflective way.
The CMT is comprised of five worksheets.
• Classroom Management Overview: The first sheet in this tool directly relates to faculty contracts and facilitation requirements. The Faculty Tips column explains the expectation in meeting the goal of each contract item.
• Qualitative Participation: The second sheet in the tool is the rubric for faculty participation. Faculty are encouraged to use a blend of the four elements of participation during each class meeting for local campus classes and throughout the week for online courses.
• Qualitative Feedback: The third sheet is for evaluating the quality of feedback offered to students on assignments. Faculty members are required to provide qualitative and quantitative feedback on all assessed activities. All four elements shown in the rubric should be implemented on assignment feedback. Not every assessment needs to contain all elements; each element should be present in the collective feedback for the week.
• Associate Program Requirements: The fourth sheet is a listing of all Associate program facilitation requirements, as set forth in the solicitation message for each course contract.
• Bach&Grad Program Requirements: The fifth sheet is a listing of all Bachelor and Graduate program facilitation requirements, as set forth in the solicitation message for each course contract.
The Qualitative Participation and Qualitative Feedback worksheets feature four main elements. The four elements of the Qualitative Participation rubric are the following:
• Manages the Mechanics
• Maintains Focus on Course Objectives
• Adds Expertise
• Encourages Higher Level Thinking
The Qualitative Feedback rubric consists of these four elements:
• Encourages and Recognizes Assignment Parameters
• Provides Corrective Feedback
• Offers Informative Feedback
• Promotes Socratic Feedback
Within each rubric, there are four columns in the CMT: Element Description, Needs Improvement, Meets Requirement, and Exemplary. In an effort to foster continuous improvement, faculty are encouraged to strive toward or demonstrate exemplary participation and feedback practices in the classroom. Self-reflection is an important part of the facilitation process and using the CMT can serve as a guide when conducting self-evaluations.
CMT – Qualitative Participation
Substantive Faculty Participation – Qualitative Measures
As a facilitator, you play a key role in facilitating student learning. Leading a vibrant and interactive class discussion is a major part of that learning experience. Substantive participation has the desired effect of moving classroom discussion forward and contributing to overall knowledge acquisition. Acceptable substantive participation will include elements from each descriptor that follows. A blend of the following participation elements should be present consistently throughout each online week or on campus class meeting.
• Element 1: Facilitator manages the mechanics of the discussions
o Participates in discussion in a timely manner
o Engages in discussion with all class members
• Element 2: Facilitator maintains focus on course objectives
o Relates course materials into the discussion
o Participates in ongoing academic content discussion
• Element 3: Facilitator adds expertise
o Integrates practitioner perspective and experience
o Integrates current research and events beyond the text and required readings
• Element 4: Facilitator encourages higher-level thinking
o Challenges students to define and defend assertions
o Promotes higher-order thinking skills
Element 1: Managing the Mechanics
An important first step in effectively facilitating a dynamic learning environment involves managing the mechanics of the class discussion. As conversations unfold, it is important to approach the discussion in a balanced manner, whereby all students are included and welcomed to get involved in the exchange. Inviting students to participate in class conversations in conjunction with an acknowledgement of individual contributions fosters increased student engagement. “Learning occurs best in an environment that contains positive interpersonal relationships and interactions and in which the learner feels appreciated, acknowledged, respected and validated” (Henson, 2003, p. 6). Finding ways to draw students into the discussion, especially those who are not as visibly connected, demonstrates an equitable and active management approach to classroom discussion. As a facilitator, building from student comments to create a more interactive experience will engage more students and lead them to enhanced comprehension of course topics.
Element 2: Maintaining the Focus on Course Objectives
A dynamic learning experience is created when discussions support and illuminate course objectives. One way to reach this goal is by regularly connecting course materials to class discussions. Careful reflection on methods of how best to incorporate these materials can lead to a dialogue that is stimulating, interactive, and meaningful for the student.
Students must be prompted to further explore and reflect on class topics. The facilitator must guide students’ thinking in a way that challenges them actively to delve into materials, rather than providing perfunctory responses in discussion. Fox noted (as cited in Grow, 1991) that teachers should avoid “accepting and valuing almost anything from anybody” (p. 141). Pushing students beyond mere opinion, directing them to specific resources, and challenging them to support their assertions, allows us to check for their understanding of concepts learned and encourage deeper thinking on the topics being explored.
Element 3: Adding Expertise
A cornerstone of the University of Phoenix learning model is that we have experienced professionals in the classrooms. Sharing your experiences as they connect to the course topics, objectives, and readings can help bring subjects to life and make the class concepts more relevant and interesting to the student. To set the stage for information retention, the student must perceive the content to have purpose and meaning in light of the experience. “Learning is a process that occurs best when what is being learned is relevant and meaningful to the learner and when the learner is actively engaged in creating his or her own knowledge…” (Henson, 2003, p. 6). Using your professional knowledge and experience to expand on the course topics can better illustrate the concepts while challenging students to relate the information to real-world applications.
Incorporating current research and events into the class discussion is another effective way to use your practitioner expertise and provide more meaning to course topics. Helping students understand what they are learning in class and place it in a larger context takes their understanding to a deeper, more critical level. This can be achieved by discussing current events, issues, and topics as they pertain to the class material. Additionally, students should be challenged to think about their experiences and observations in light of current issues. Throughout this process, practice reflective teaching by checking students’ interpretation and applying key course concepts and providing feedback along the way.
Element 4: Encouraging Higher-Level Thinking
Creating a highly interactive and lively discussion environment is vital in stimulating creative and critical thinking in students. Research shows that faculty who promote this level of thinking in their classes demonstrate the following characteristics:
• Be objective
o Discern between opinions, observations, and fact.
o Keep observations objective and thorough, so factual and contextual evidence is obtained.
o Be careful with inferences and assumptions.
o Identify and challenge assumptions.
• Be open
o Keep an open mind when forming opinions.
o Generate constructive, alternative viewpoints in an ongoing discussion.
o Imagine and explore alternatives leading to reflective skepticism.
o Shift the perspective to consider new opinions and viewpoints.
o Take risks. Approach and challenge students in an affirming, positive manner.
o Encourage independent thought from individual students.
o View problems and controversial issues as challenges.
o Use Socratic questioning techniques.
• Consider interpersonal and intrapersonal skills
o Use reflective techniques to assist students in understanding attitudes, assumptions, beliefs, and self-knowledge.
o Be honest with yourself to acknowledge what you do and do not know.
o Be genuinely interested in others’ ideas even when they disagree with yours. Practice restraint and control your feelings before reacting.
In addition to modeling these qualities through your unique facilitative style, one way to encourage higher-level thinking is through Socratic questioning. Socratic questioning is a learner-focused form of questioning that puts the emphasis on developing critical and creative thinking skills. This approach helps students construct knowledge and understanding, which, in turn, leads to greater knowledge retention.
Socratic questioning works well with adult learners, because they do not want to be told what to think; most adult learners want to arrive at answers. Effective Socratic questioning must help adult learners develop goals, understand process, and take appropriate action. In other words, Socratic questioning must help them become intentional learners.
Whether online or face-to-face, facilitators may improve substantive participation in discussions by modeling the participation they expect from students. This can be achieved through a careful balance of the four key substantive participation elements: managing the mechanics of class discussion, maintaining the focus on course objectives, adding practitioner expertise, and using strategies that encourage higher-order thinking. A blend of these elements should be present in a facilitator’s participation effort.
References
Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education
Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149. Retrieved from
Henson, K. T. (2003). Foundations for learner-centered education: a knowledge
base. Education. 124(11), 5-17. Retrieved from
ABC Facilitation Model and the CMT
As highlighted in the Classroom Management Tool (CMT), a variety of approaches support substantive faculty participation in discussions. One important facilitation technique that facilitators can employ in class discussions is the ABC Facilitation Model.
• Acknowledge something the individual has said.
• Build by adding personal experience or observations or relevant course content.
• Conclude with a question to the individual or class.
By regularly applying the ABC Facilitation model in the classroom, a facilitator will ultimately incorporate a number of exemplary CMT participation practices. The ABC Facilitation model can be applied in a variety of ways. Here are some ABC tips and techniques:
• When discussing a subject, provide a practical workplace example and follow up by asking students to provide an example that supports or contradicts what is being discussed.
• Given most subjects, the debate format often provides ample opportunity to offer substantive input, especially if there are valid points on either side of an argument. Sometimes, it is effective to take the devil's advocate position and offer substantiation for the opposing viewpoint based on readings or personal experience.
• You may affirm another person's comments by letting them know that they provided a new perspective or aspect that was previously overlooked and ask or explain how this knowledge affects the discussion.
• Challenge a student's statement by providing a relevant example. Then, ask him or her to consider an alternative perspective and ask the individual to support that view.
Highly facilitative participation includes the following:
• Building on student comments by suggesting alternative solutions, adding other perspectives, pointing out problems, and disagreeing constructively
• Encouraging students to apply course concepts to the workplace environment and their daily lives
• Encouraging student participation by asking probing questions that encourage them to think deeply
• Demonstrating content knowledge by sharing experiences and analyzing course concepts in the class discussions
• Referring to current course readings and asking students to apply these course materials to their participation efforts
Applying the ABC approach in class discussions can add value for individual students and improve group learning as a whole. This methodology can generate lively discussions, replete with insight, new ideas, and expanding views.
CMT – Qualitative Feedback
Substantive Faculty Feedback – Qualitative Measures
The quality of faculty feedback influences students’ feelings of connectedness and satisfaction through three primary types of feedback as identified by Blignaut & Trollip’s (2003) Taxonomy of Feedback: corrective; informative; and Socratic. These three principles form the foundation of the Qualitative Feedback rubric in the Classroom Management Tool. Substantive faculty feedback includes multiple combinations of the following:
• Element 1:Facilitator encourages and recognizes
o Feedback includes comments that support students and acknowledges their submissions.
• Element 2: Facilitator provides corrective feedback
o Feedback corrects the content of a student’s response or work and suggests improvement.
• Element 3:Facilitator offers informative feedback
o Feedback on the content of a student’s response, answer, or work is given in a clear and understandable manner, pointing out strengths and weaknesses.
• Element 4: Facilitator promotes Socratic feedback
o Feedback promotes reflection, encourages critical thinking, and leads to a deeper understanding of the topic for the student.
Element 1: Encourages and Recognizes
When issuing assignment feedback, facilitators should provide comments that support students by acknowledging their assignment submissions or participation contributions. Addressing the student by name is an effective way to personalize feedback and establish a positive tone for the feedback. Including courteous salutations, concluding remarks, and encouraging comments is another sound strategy. Further, point out positive aspects of a submission or participation effort, such as being on time, meeting the word count, effective APA formatting, effective analysis or critical thinking, and so forth. Finally, inform the student if they addressed all elements of an assignment.
Element 2: Provides Corrective Feedback
This element asks the facilitator to craft feedback that corrects the student’s work and suggests areas for improvement. Corrective feedback should be given for all assignments. If no corrections can be found, challenge the student to elevate his or her performance more in future coursework. Affirmative comments such as “Good job,” should be supplemented with other constructive observations. Pointing out missing content elements or specific errors related to mechanics, formatting, APA, and so forth, are effective feedback methods. An exemplary practice is to direct students to the text, class materials, related outside sources, and university resources. For example, if writing errors are identified, it is advisable to ask a student to visit the Center for Writing Excellence and utilize WritePoint, RiverPoint Writer, or explore applicable writing related tutorials. This effort supports student development and improvement, and is in alignment with this important element of the feedback rubric.
Element 3: Offers Informative Feedback
Useful feedback usually is specific, content-oriented comments that lead students to a better understanding of their performance. In this way, faculty should evaluate student work based on three key indicators: content, organization, and mechanics. UOPX grading forms, or rubrics, feature these facets of effective assignment feedback. Rubrics provide a structural platform to acknowledge strengths and address opportunities for improvement in a clear and concise manner. Returning graded papers can further enhance student learning. A combination of in-text comments and a rubric is likely the most common and optimal method in furnishing comprehensive, constructive feedback.
Element 4: Promotes Socratic Feedback
This element supports a feedback technique that elicits self-reflection and deeper analysis of an assignment or overall course content. Asking questions in a manner that stimulates critical thinking is the overall objective of this component. When Socratic questioning is introduced in graded assignments and in the comment sections of the Gradebook, this objective can be accomplished. Moreover, reflection is achieved by encouraging students to think about possible improvements in their work and leading them to alternative resources that will strengthen subject matter comprehension.
Note. Timely and effective feedback, using a combination of the four elements of feedback detailed above, can lead to increased student satisfaction, retention, and performance. Students depend on faculty feedback to uncover their strengths and areas of needed improvement. With this information, they can make necessary adjustments for future assignments.
Reference
Blignaut, S., & Trollip, S. (2003, June). A taxonomy for faculty participation in
asynchronous online discussions [Electronic version]. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 2003(1), 2043–2050. Retrieved from
The Socratic Method and Student Feedback
The Socratic method, named after the Greek philosopher Socrates, is a questioning technique used to stimulate higher-order thinking. If Socrates was alive today, would he be surprised at how his philosophical questioning technique has evolved into an effective feedback mechanism often used by faculty in higher education?
You may use the Socratic method in your student feedback by asking students a series of questions to encourage them to think critically and formulate questions and answers. By taking an active role in their learning, students are more likely to retain information gained by the Socratic method (Paraskevas & Wickens, 2003).
Purpose of the Socratic Method
The Socratic method can be implemented in many ways, but the recommended use in University of Phoenix classrooms includes the following purposes.
Engage Students in Their Learning
When you ask students a question, they are prompted to think about it and respond with an answer. Once students answer, they become active participants in their learning. When you use Socratic questioning to probe deeper into a subject, students generate questions and become more engaged in their learning.
Guide Students to Solutions
Students often need help with finding solutions to problems. Socratic questioning guides students to deeper understanding of a subject and finding their solutions.
Build Student Confidence in Their Abilities
As students successfully solve problems or answer questions with guidance from you, they learn to trust their instincts and resources. As they become more proficient with problem-solving, they need less support from you. As students go from one successful problem-solving experience to another, their confidence grows. Eventually, students become independent learners.
Help Students to Develop Information Pathways
Socratic questioning assists students with thinking clearly about the concepts they are learning. As you encourage students to probe deeper into a subject, students make connections between course concepts and develop a greater understanding of the relationship among these concepts.
Help Students to Think Deeply About Concepts
Answering questions and generating solutions is difficult. Students must think critically and thoroughly about problems and solutions. Socratic questioning stimulates deeper thinking in students so they have a more complete understanding of course concepts and can connect with other concepts.
The Socratic Method
Effective use of the Socratic method requires asking students probing questions to stimulate deeper thinking. In order to formulate these questions and elicit substantial responses from students, you need to understand thinking and how to assess it (Paul & Elder, 2007).
The following table, based on the Socratic questioning techniques described in The Thinker’s Guide to The Art of Socratic Questioning, outlines various types of Socratic questions that may be used to guide students in their critical thinking. These types of questions are derived from the elements of reasoning and intellectual standards. To learn more about the elements and standards and their relationship with critical thinking and Socratic questioning, refer to the Fundamentals of Critical Thinking articles accessed from the Library/Articles section of the Foundation for Critical Thinking website at .
When you want to use a Socratic questioning technique in your feedback to students, review the guidelines and sample questions for each type of Socratic questioning in this table to assess student thinking and determine the appropriate question to use.
|Type of Socratic Questioning |Guidelines |Sample Questions |
|Questioning Goals and Purposes |All thought reflects an agenda or purpose. Assume |Questions that focus on purpose in thinking include: |
| |that you do not fully understand someone’s thought|What is your purpose right now? |
| |(including your own) until you understand the |What was your purpose when you made that comment? |
| |agenda behind it. |Why are you writing this? |
| | |Who is your audience? |
| | |What do you want to persuade them of? |
| | |What are you trying to accomplish here? |
| | |What is your central aim or task in this line of thought? |
| | |What is the purpose of this assignment/chapter/relationship/policy/law? |
|Questioning Questions |All thought is responsive to a question. Assume |Questions that focus on questions in thinking include: |
| |that you do not fully understand a thought until |I am not sure exactly what question you are raising. Could you explain it? |
| |you understand the question that gives rise to it.|What are the main questions that guide the way you behave in this or that |
| | |situation? |
| | |Is this question the best one to focus on at this point, or is there a more |
| | |pressing question you need to address? |
| | |What questions might you be failing to ask that you should be asking? |
| | | |
|Questioning Information, Data, |All thoughts presuppose an information base. |Questions that focus on information in thinking include: |
|and Experience |Assume that you do not fully understand the |On what information are you basing that comment? |
| |thought until you understand the background |What experience convinced you of this? |
| |information (facts, data, experiences) that |Could your experience be distorted? |
| |supports or informs it. |How do you know this information is accurate? |
| | |How could you verify it? |
| | |Have you failed to consider any information or data you need to consider? |
| | |What are these data based on? |
| | |How were they developed? |
| | |Is your conclusion based on hard facts or soft data? |
| | | |
|Questioning Inferences and |All thought requires the making of inferences, the|Questions that focus on inferences and conclusions in thinking include: |
|Conclusions |drawing of conclusions, the creation of meaning. |How did you reach that conclusion? |
| |Assume that you do not fully understand a thought |Could you explain your reasoning? |
| |until you understand the inferences that have |Is there an alternative, plausible conclusion? |
| |shaped it. |Given all the facts, what is the best possible conclusion? |
|Questioning Concepts and Ideas |All thought involves the application of concepts. |Questions that focus on concepts in thinking include: |
| |Assume that you do not fully understand a thought |What is the main idea you are using in your reasoning? Could you explain |
| |until you understand the concepts that define and |that idea? |
| |shape it. |Are you using the appropriate concept, or do you need to reconceptualize the|
| | |problem? |
| | |Do you need more facts, or do you need to rethink how you are labeling the |
| | |facts? |
|Questioning Assumptions |All thought rests upon assumptions. Assume that |Questions that focus on assumptions in thinking include: |
| |you do not fully understand a thought until you |What exactly are you taking for granted here? |
| |understand what it takes for granted. |Why are you assuming that? Shouldn’t we rather assume that…? |
| | |What assumptions underlie your point of view? What alternative assumptions |
| | |might you make? |
| | | |
|Questioning Implications and |All thought is headed in a direction. It not only |Questions that focus on implications in thinking include: |
|Consequences |begins somewhere (resting on assumptions), it also|What are you implying when you say…? |
| |goes somewhere (has implications and |If you do this, what is likely to happen as a result? |
| |consequences). Assume that you do not fully |Are you implying that…? |
| |understand a thought unless you know the most |Have you considered the implications of this policy (or practice)? |
| |important implications and consequences that | |
| |follow from it. | |
|Questioning Viewpoints and |All thought takes place within a point of view or |Questions that focus on point of view in thinking include: |
|Perspectives |frame of reference. Assume that you do not fully |From what point of view are you looking at this? |
| |understand a thought until you understand the |Is there another point of view you should consider? |
| |point of view or frame of reference that places it|Which of these possible viewpoints makes the most sense given the situation?|
| |on an intellectual map. | |
|Questioning Clarity |Recognize that thinking is always more or less |Questions that focus on clarity in thinking include: |
| |clear. Assume that you do not fully understand a |Could you elaborate on what you’re saying? |
| |thought except to the extent you can elaborate, |Could you give me an example or illustration of your point? I hear you |
| |illustrate, and exemplify it. |saying “____.” |
| | |Am I hearing you correctly, or have I misunderstood you? |
This table contains information, obtained with the author’s permission, from The Thinker’s Guide to The Art of Socratic Questioning.
References
Paraskevas, A., & Wickens, E. (2003). Andragogy and the Socratic method: The
adult learner perspective. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Education,2(2), 4-14. Retrieved from
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). The thinker’s guide to the art of Socratic questioning.
Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking,
-----------------------
Advanced Facilitator Certification
Combined Weekly Readings
Version 0413A
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- university of phoenix portal
- university of phoenix online sign in
- university of phoenix ecampus website
- university of phoenix ecampus portal
- university of phoenix majors list
- university of phoenix bachelor programs
- university of phoenix bachelors cost
- university of phoenix student portal
- university of phoenix ecampus log in
- university of phoenix site down
- university of phoenix biology degree
- university of phoenix employee portal