Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Course Design: The Basics Monica A. Devanas, Ph.D. Director, Faculty Development and Assessment Programs Center for Teaching Advancement and Assessment.
Advertisements

Ackward esign. Teachers are designers. The effectiveness of their designs corresponds to whether they have accomplished their goals for the end users.
Stage 1: Identify desired results. Stage 2: Determine acceptable evidence. Stage 3: Plan learning experiences and instruction. Wiggins, G & McTighe. J,
Understanding by Design An Overview by Eduardo M. Valerio, Ph.D.
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota.
Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota University.
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning Karl Smith University of Minnesota Civil Engineering.
University of Missouri – Rolla Center for Educational Research & Teaching Innovation January 5, 2006 Karl Smith University of Minnesota Civil Engineering.
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Foundations of Design of High Performance Team Learning Environments – Understanding by Design and How People Learn Karl A. Smith Engineering Education.
1 Teaching for Learning: Using Active Learning Strategies & Cooperative Student Groups to Promote Learning in Lecture Classes – Session 4 Karl Smith Civil.
Click to edit Master title style 2009 Workshop for The Committee for the Formation of Engineers Puebla-Tlaxcala Content, Assessment and Pedagogy (CAP):
Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning (Challenge-Based/Problem-Based Example) Karl Smith University of Minnesota Civil Engineering
Design Down Curriculum Planning & Cooperative Learning Douglas Gosse, PhD Nipissing University, Office H120 TEL: ,
USING BACKWARD DESIGN FOR UNIT AND LESSON PLANS * Based on the thinking that if everyone has a clear picture of where they are going before they start,
Paul Parkison: Teacher Education 1 Articulating and Assessing Learning Outcomes Stating Objectives Developing Rubrics Utilizing Formative Assessment.
1 Teaching for Learning: Using Active Learning Strategies & Cooperative Student Groups to Promote Learning in Lecture Classes – Session 3 Karl Smith Civil.
The Backward Design Process
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning Karl Smith University of Minnesota Civil Engineering.
Design Down Curriculum Planning & Cooperative Learning Douglas Gosse, PhD Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education Office A145 Nipissing University 100.
Designing Cooperative Learning Applications Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota  Felder & Brent B Course Design  Wiggins & McTighe B Understanding.
Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Classes Michigan State University 12th Annual Spring Institute Karl Smith University.
UNDERSTANDING BY DESIGN
Bloom’s Taxonomy The Concept of “Levels of Thinking”
Writing Learning Outcomes Best Practices. Do Now What is your process for writing learning objectives? How do you come up with the information?
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning Karl Smith University of Minnesota May 2004.
Problem-Based Cooperative Learning
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Bloom’s Taxonomy Investigating Cognitive Complexity
Three Ways to Structure Cooperative Learning: Formal-Informal-Base
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Active/Cooperative Learning (ACL) & Teamwork
University of Minnesota – Duluth
Virginia Tech CEUT Teaching Enhancement Workshop November 2006
Drake University Designing Courses that Help Students Learn
Design and Implementation of Pegadogies of Engagement
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University
North Carolina A & T – Faculty Workshop Academic Bridge Program
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning
University of Wisconsin - Platteville
University of Minnesota
Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning
Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning
Utah State University Designing Courses that Help Students Learn
Introduction to Cooperative Learning and Foundations of Course Design
Three Ways to Structure Cooperative Learning: Informal-Formal-Base
Project-Based Cooperative Learning
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning
Three Ways to Structure Cooperative Learning: Informal-Formal-Base
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Taxonomies Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive Domain (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision.
Designing Courses that Help Students Learn Louisiana State University
Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Michigan State University Spring Institute on Teaching and Learning
Writing Learning Outcomes
National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering Education
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering Education
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Brigham Young University
Design & Implementation of Problem-Based Cooperative Learning
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Designing Courses that Help Students Learn Michigan State University
Three Ways to Structure Cooperative Learning: Formal-Informal-Base
Structuring Cooperative Learning:
Design and Implementation of Pedagogies of Engagement
Presentation transcript:

Design & Implementation of Cooperative Learning Karl Smith University of Minnesota August 2004

Effective Course Design (Felder & Brent, 1999) EC 2000 Bloom’s Taxonomy Course-specific goals & objectives Goals and Objectives Classroom assessment techniques Technology Cooperative learning Students Instruction Assessment Other experiences Tests Other measures Lectures Labs

Backward Design Stage 1. Identify Desired Results Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction

Backward Design Stage 1. Identify Desired Results Filter 1. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process represent a big idea or having enduring value beyond the classroom? Filter 2. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process reside at the heart of the discipline? Filter 3. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process require uncoverage? Filter 4. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process offer potential for engaging students?

Backward Design Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence Types of Assessment Quiz and Test Items: Simple, content-focused test items Academic Prompts: Open-ended questions or problems that require the student to think critically Performance Tasks or Projects: Complex challenges that mirror the issues or problems faced by graduates, they are authentic

Understanding Understanding Stage 1. Identify Desired Results Focus Question: What does it mean to “understand”? Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence Focus Questions: “How will we know if students have achieved the desired results and met the standards? What will we accept as evidence of student understanding and proficiency (Wiggins & McTighe)

Understanding Misunderstanding A Private Universe – 21 minute video available from www.learner.org Also see Minds of our own (Annenberg/CPB Math and Science Collection – www.learner.org) Can we believe our eyes? Lessons from thin air Under construction

A Self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning L. Dee Fink. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences. Jossey-Bass.

Worksheet for Designing a Course/Class Session Ways of Assessing Actual Teaching-Learning Helpful Resources: Learning Goals for Course/Session: This Kind of Learning: Activities: (e.g., people, things) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Taxonomies Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive Domain (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Facets of understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998) Taxonomy of significant learning (Dee Fink, 2003)

The Six Major Levels of Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain (with representative behaviors and sample objectives) Knowledge. Remembering information Define, identify, label, state, list, match Identify the standard peripheral components of a computer Write the equation for the Ideal Gas Law Comprehension. Explaining the meaning of information Describe, generalize, paraphrase, summarize, estimate In one sentence explain the main idea of a written passage Describe in prose what is shown in graph form Application. Using abstractions in concrete situations Determine, chart, implement, prepare, solve, use, develop Using principles of operant conditioning, train a rate to press a bar Derive a kinetic model from experimental data Analysis. Breaking down a whole into component parts Points out, differentiate, distinguish, discriminate, compare Identify supporting evidence to support the interpretation of a literary passage Analyze an oscillator circuit and determine the frequency of oscillation Synthesis. Putting parts together to form a new and integrated whole Create, design, plan, organize, generate, write Write a logically organized essay in favor of euthanasia Develop an individualized nutrition program for a diabetic patient Evaluation. Making judgments about the merits of ideas, materials, or phenomena Appraise, critique, judge, weigh, evaluate, select Assess the appropriateness of an author's conclusions based on the evidence given Select the best proposal for a proposed water treatment plant

Facets of Understanding Wiggins & McTighe, 1998, page 44 When we truly understand,we Can explain Can interpret Can apply Have perspective Can empathize Have self-knowledge

Backward Design Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences & Instruction What enabling knowledge (facts, concepts, and principles) and skills (procedures) will students need to perform effectively and achieve desired results? What activities will equip students with the needed knowledge and skills? What will need to be taught and coached, and how should it be taught, in light of performance goals? What materials and resources are best suited to accomplish these goals? Is the overall design coherent and effective?

Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

Formal Cooperative Learning Professor's Role in Formal Cooperative Learning 1. Specifying Objectives 2. Making Decisions 3. Explaining Task, Positive Interdependence, and Individual Accountability 4. Monitoring and Intervening to Teach Skills 5. Evaluating Students' Achievement and Group Effectiveness Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www) One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"

Problem Based Cooperative Learning Format TASK: Solve the problem(s) or Complete the project. INDIVIDUAL: Estimate answer. Note strategy. COOPERATIVE: One set of answers from the group, strive for agreement, make sure everyone is able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem. EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone must be able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem. EVALUATION: Best answer within available resources or constraints. INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: One member from your group may be randomly chosen to explain (a) the answer and (b) how to solve each problem. EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Active participating, checking, encouraging, and elaborating by all members. INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group. Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www) One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"

Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

Group Processing B Plus/Delta Format B Delta Plus Things That Group Did Well Delta Things Group Could Improve Conversations in Teaching and Learning [MSU] - 3/14/03

We never educate directly, but indirectly by means of the environment We never educate directly, but indirectly by means of the environment. Whether we permit chance environments to do the work, or whether we design environments for the purpose makes a great difference. John Dewey, 1906 It could well be that faculty members of the twenty-first century college or university will find it necessary to set aside their roles as teachers and instead become designers of learning experiences, processes, and environments James Duderstadt, 1999