TWO INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVES ADAPTIVE LEARNING: TWO INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVES Thursday Feb 4th, 2016 8:30 - 9:15 AM Central Time EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative Virtual Conference 2016 Dale P. Johnson, ASU Debbie L. Kirkley, UCF

Poll Where are you in your work with adaptive learning systems? 1. Thinking about it 2. Trying it out 3. Implementing 4. Evaluating the outcomes

Your Presenters Dale Johnson Software is necessary Manager, Adaptive General Education Program,  Arizona State University Multi-Vendor strategy – Flipped Classroom pedagogy Cengage with Knewton MindTap - psychology CogBooks – biology and US history Kahn Academy – remedial math Knewton – remedial math McGraw Hill ALEKS - college algebra McGraw Hill LearnSmart Master - remedial math McGraw Hill LearnSmart Master - chemistry Pearson with Knewton MyMath Lab - college algebra Pearson with Knewton – Mastering Physics SmartSparrow – Habitable Worlds custom science course Software is necessary but not sufficient to enable student success.

UCF’s Pilot Project Debbie L. Kirkley Faculty Driven Faculty Decision Instructional Designer, University of Central Florida Faculty Driven Faculty Decision Faculty Chose… Important: Faculty driven; wanted a product they could build using their own content; wanted both adaptive assessment and adaptive content; Faculty felt RealizeIT provided the best of both worlds Subject agnostic authoring features Adaptive learning and assessment Robust analytic component

UCF’s Pilot Project Pilot Courses – Fall 2014-2015 Courses – Spring 2016 Statistics for Educational Data Important: Faculty driven; wanted a product they could build using their own content; wanted both adaptive assessment and adaptive content; Faculty felt RealizeIT provided the best of both worlds Courses – In Progress Bachelor of Applied Science – 16 courses Education Engineering

Learning Objectives Outline things to consider when choosing AL systems Identify key course components requiring redesign for personalized learning Compare current online teaching practices with those required for adaptive learning

What is the promise of adaptivity? Students OFF-TRACK Students ON-Track Who needs help? What do they need help with? Key goals of redesign What’s the best way to help?

How are AL systems different? LMS ADAPTIVE - Lesson Plan Fixed Personalized Variable Individual - Presentation Group - Content Common

Where are we in the technology cycle? WE ARE ALL HERE! Adaptive learning systems are still experimental.

What course type will you build? Self-paced or Synced Harder to manage Simpler structure Flexible exam dates Fixed exam dates Less community More interactive Competency Completion Faculty need to make this decision.

What AL system approach is right for you? Construct or Configure Time consuming Quick Flexible Constrained Costly Cheap Riskier Safer Consider the commitment before committing.

CogBooks Curriculum Chart What are some system examples? Construct Configure CogBooks Curriculum Chart LO2 LO5 LO8 Learning Objective 1 LO4 LOx LO3 LO7 LO6 The technology is still evolving rapidly.

What types of Support Staff will you need? Instructional designers Systems integrators Graphic designers Video producers Librarians Ed Tech is a team sport, so plan accordingly.

What will help Faculty succeed with AL? Strong provost & department support (and $) Faculty leadership for each course Instructor peer mentoring for training “Guide on the Side” is not for everyone Be patient, it’s a learning process The system’s success depends on the teacher!

What is personalized learning? When I joined the pilot project at UCF, my first task was to learn the definition of Personalized Adaptive Learning. I proceeded to read whatever was available and quickly found that there were many definitions. It wasn’t until our director, Tom Cavanagh, used the analogy of the blind men and the elephant that I began to understand that at this stage in the game it has a variety of explanations and that’s okay. So, Dale has shown you how they began at ASU from an aerial view. I’m going to approach this now with a view from the trenches where the rubber hits the road.

How is it different? Traditional Personalized Semester Modules/ Chunking Learning Objectives Content/Lecture Assessments – summative Personalized No time frame Nodes/Learning Bits Learning Objectives Content – Textbook? Assessments within content - formative

Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction 1. Gaining attention 2. Informing the learner of the objective 3. Stimulating recall of prerequisite learning 4. Presenting new material 5. Providing learning guidance 6. Eliciting performance 7. Providing feedback about correctness 8. Assessing performance 9. Enhancing retention and recall Gagne suggests that learning tasks for intellectual skills can be organized in a hierarchy according to complexity: stimulus recognition, response generation, procedure following, use of terminology, discriminations, concept formation, rule application, and problem solving. The primary significance of the hierarchy is to identify prerequisites that should be completed to facilitate learning at each level. Prerequisites are identified by doing a task analysis of a learning/training task. Learning hierarchies provide a basis for the sequencing of instruction. Structure of observed learning outcome The structure of observed learning outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy is a model that describes levels of increasing complexity in student's understanding of subjects. Biggs & Collis Keller’s ARCS Model

<iframe src="//www. slideshare <iframe src="//www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/doD8vlNCzPEehq" width="425" height="355" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" style="border:1px solid #CCC; border-width:1px; margin-bottom:5px; max-width: 100%;" allowfullscreen> </iframe> <div style="margin-bottom:5px"> <strong> <a href="//www.slideshare.net/rjames01/motivation-and-learrning" title="Motivation and Learning" target="_blank">Motivation and Learning</a> </strong> from <strong><a href="//www.slideshare.net/rjames01" target="_blank">Rich James</a></strong> </div> http://www.slideshare.net/rjames01/motivation-and-learrning

Personalized Learning Spectrum F2F Hybrid / Blended Fully online One concept or topic In-depth, minute detailed full course Few modules or concepts Every module – simple use with feedback Every module – advanced use Review only Case Studies One of the first challenges we had was defining how personalized adaptive learning would look at the Univ. of Central Florida. The system we had chosen left room open to provide a multitude of options when designing the courses. Here you can see how we envisioned what these possibilities would look like. We had faculty who were not quite eager to put their whole course online so we started them off with just a few modules from their traditional online courses. Another course decided to go the hybrid route with the modules online for the students but she would meet with them each week to reinforce and augment any gaps in their learning. Our other pilot courses determined that the entire course would be implemented using the adaptive system. We’re now looking at doing this for a whole program of study. Some courses will include the modules for review or remediation purposes only. The possibilities are endless and adaptable to most any situation. Remediation Content online – complete textbook Lecture in class – to answer questions Discussions – other collaborative components Projects – authentic assessments

Setting Priorities Become familiar with Important to know Enduring understanding

What makes it different? Organization Learning Map Design Hierarchical Structure/ Framework Organized by objective Granularized into learning bits Architecture of a Personalized Course Learning Outcomes Course Overview Module nodes Granularization / chunking / learning bits Setting priorities What about objectives

Learning Path example

What makes PL different? Content Centric Design Types - Enriching Passive Reading Worked / Interactive Examples Graphics/charts/ diagrams Video / audio OER e-Textbooks Sequencing Sequencing possibilities Alternative Content

Content example

What makes AL different? Assessment Design Built-in Assessment structure Quiz questions within content nodes Composite Score Knowledge state Ability / Time / Effort Exam capable Question Enhancement MC, True-False, Matching, etc. Variables Conditions Examples / Case Studies Feedback

Assessment example w/variables

Faculty Development Guide Work Flow Process Course Analysis Forms Consultation Checklist

Obstacles = Challenges Implementing Personalized Learning Track Collaboration and interaction Faculty Buy-In Cheating

Questions? Robert Frost