Active Learning Conference, ARU 12th September 2017 Ellie Kennedy, NTU Public Thinking Active Learning Conference, ARU 12th September 2017 Ellie Kennedy, NTU

Session aims/outline Explore ‘public thinking’ as a concept to describe a set of (already common) practices Discuss benefits, examples, challenges Do some public thinking Discuss how public thinking might support disadvantaged students Create an idea to take away

What is public thinking? Students sharing ideas-in-development, work-in-progress, workings-out, etc. with one or more peers for discussion, critique and support May or may not involve the tutor Can be designed into in-session and pre-/post-session activities It isn’t: sharing polished work or giving a formal presentation

Public thinking Vuopala et al notes that ‘Studies have indicated that in collaborative learning, well-performing groups elaborate further each other’s responses and ask complex questions, which refer to high levels of cognitive processing’ (Vuopala, 2016). Integral to SCALE-UP and TBL Activities and equipment designed to support sharing of work and ideas (‘workings-out’/ideas-in-progress) Can be done without any specialist equipment or space Critique and support from peers and tutor

Activity—thinking about public thinking (5 min) In groups, choose one topic and brainstorm examples: public thinking activities (real or hypothetical examples) benefits of public thinking tools to support public thinking support to help students engage successfully in public thinking

Examples from SCALE-UP Plenary. “Coach the students during activities by assisting them in answering their own questions and by letting students present their results to the class for review by instructors and peers as opposed to just telling students the answer.” Small group. Groups who have completed a task successfully are sent to help groups that are struggling. Individual. “At the end of a task, we will often stop class for a minute or two while students add comments to [a classmate’s] notes that specifically address the questions “what am I supposed to learn from this?” and “why are we doing this?” Requiring them to write these notes for their neighbors ensures they put careful thought into their work.” Example from TBL?

Some tools to support public thinking Whiteboards Mirror from laptop or own device Air drop from laptop Tweet Flipchart paper Padlet Shared document such as google docs Others…

SCALE-UP layout and equipment why round tables (or plectrum) and shared laptops & whiteboards To foster collaboration, social setting (restaurant) the redesigned learning environment incorporates circular tables, shared networked laptops, whiteboards, and large screens to which student work can be projected and shared. Round tables – restaurant style social setting - this is more about room layout to enable collaboration

Some benefits of public thinking renders the enquiry process visible (in contrast to traditional lecture-homework model) tutors can observe learning and identify sticking points peers learn from each other’s successes students more likely to share a question/problem in a small group of peers timely formative feedback safe to make and learn from mistakes fosters skills in producing and applying feedback builds positive relationships

Public thinking: possible challenges for students Understanding aims & benefits Passive versus active How different to other modes of learning? Engaging in activities Public thinking: possible challenges for students Understanding the task Collaborative mind-set Skills in reflection Skills in peer teaching & critique Confidence using tools If this is a shift learning approach students may feel challenged Confidence to share unfinished work

HEFCE Catalyst Project NTU/ARU/Bradford The programme aims to address barriers to student success by supporting 17 projects, 64 different HE providers funded through the Catalyst Fund. The students most affected by differential outcomes are: black and minority ethnic (BME) students students from low socio-economic backgrounds disabled students mature students These groups experience significant differences in levels of retention, attainment, progression to postgraduate study and progression into work. Universal design: support all students. Catalyst project: roll out SCALE-UP/TBL to support all students, and thereby—it is hoped—narrow attainment disparities.

Activity—applying the concept of public thinking (10 min) In pairs, think of an idea for a public thinking activity which a whole cohort could engage in and which could particularly support students from disadvantaged groups. Prepare to share your idea via a public thinking tool. https://padlet.com/ellie_kennedy/ARUPTS (for one or more groups—not all)

Activity—obtaining and applying feedback (20 min) Join up with another pair. Talk them through your idea for a public thinking activity and how it might particularly support students from disadvantaged groups. The other pair plays the role of a critical friend, asking questions and raising challenges. Record your improved idea using your selected tool Switch over so that both groups get to talk through their ideas. Selected ideas presented in plenary https://padlet.com/ellie_kennedy/ARUPTS Play by ear—is there time for them to switch over at 3 so that both pairs get to give feedback on the others’ idea? No. of ideas discussed in plenary will depend on time and no. of groups.

Further points to consider ways to build student confidence to engage with public thinking activities ways to encourage and support staff to incorporate more public thinking activities into their practice https://padlet.com/ellie_kennedy/ARUPTS

References Beichner, R. J et al (2007). The Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) Project (ONLINE).Available at: http://www.percentral.org/document/ServeFile.cfm?ID=4517 (Accessed 4/09/2017) Centre for Academic Development and Quality. (2017). SCALE-UP Handbook. Nottingham: Nottingham Trent University HEFCE (2015). Causes of differences in student outcomes. (ONLINE) Available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rereports/year/2015/diffout/ (Accessed 4/09/2017) HEFCE (2012). What Works? Student Retention & Success. (ONLINE) Available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/what_works_summary_report_0.pdf (Accessed 4/09/2017) Thomas, et al (2017). ‘Building student engagement and belonging in Higher Education at a time of change: a summary of findings and recommendations from the What Works? Student Retention & Success programme’ (ONLINE) Available at: http://lizthomasassociates.co.uk/downloads/2017/Summary%20report.pdf (Accessed 8/09/2017) Vuopola, E et al (2016). Interaction forms in successful collaborative learning in virtual learning environments. (ONLINE) Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1469787415616730 (Accessed 4/09/2017)