1. Design and Implementation of Active and Cooperative Learning Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota ksmith@umn.edu - http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/ Sage College of Albany January 2010

2. 2 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 [Nuclear Engineering Professor; Dean, Provost and President of the University of Michigan]

3. 3 Workshop Layout Welcome & Overview Integrated Course Design (CAP Model) –Content –Assessment –Pedagogy Active & Cooperative Learning –Informal – Bookends on a Class Session –Formal Cooperative Learning Design and Teamwork Features Wrap-up and Next Steps

4. Workshop Objectives Participants will be able to –Explain rationale for Active and Cooperative Learning –Describe key features of Cooperative Learning –Apply cooperative learning to classroom practice –Describe key features of the Backward Design process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment - Pedagogy –Identify connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs

5. Background Knowledge Survey Familiarity with –Approaches to Course Design Wiggins & McTighe – Understanding by Design (Backward Design) Fink – Creating Significant Learning Experiences Felder & Brent – Effective Course Design –Active and Cooperative Learning Strategies Informal – turn-to-your-neighbor Formal – cooperative problem-based learning –Research Student engagement – NSSE Cooperative learning How People Learn Responsibility –Individual course –Program –Accreditation –Other

6. Reflection and Dialogue Individually reflect on your familiarity with (1) Integrated Course Design and (2) Active and Cooperative Learning. Write for about 1 minute –Key ideas, insights, applications – Success Stories –Questions, concerns Discuss with your neighbor for about 3 minutes –Select one Insight, Success Story, Comment, Question, etc. that you would like to present to the whole group if you are randomly selected

7. Background Knowledge Survey Familiarity with –Approaches to Course Design Wiggins & McTighe – Understanding by Design (Backward Design) Fink – Creating Significant Learning Experiences Felder & Brent – Effective Course Design –Active and Cooperative Learning Strategies Informal – turn-to-your-neighbor Formal – cooperative problem-based learning –Research Student engagement – NSSE Cooperative learning How People Learn Responsibility –Individual course –Program –Accreditation –Other

8. PMQ1 PMIQ2 KMQ3 LeadershipQ4 EngSysQ5 IE/ORQ6 Mod/SimQ7 CASQ8 MgmtSciQ9 6 SigmaQ10 N = 29/30 MOT 8221 – 2010 Background Survey

9. SpreadQ1 PMQ2 StatQ3 Mod/SimQ4 DBQ5 ProgQ6 KM/ESQ7 N = 29/30

10. Backward Design Wiggins & McTighe Stage 1. Identify Desired Results Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction Wiggins, Grant and McTighe, Jay. 1998. Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

11. 11 Stage 1. Identify Desired Results Filters 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?

12. Backward Design Context Content Assessment Pedagogy C & A & P Alignment? End Start Yes No Integrated Course Design (Fink, 2003) 1. Situational Factors 2. Learning Goals 3. Feedback and Assessment 4. Teaching/Learning Activities 5. Integration Initial Design Phase CAP Design Process Flowchart

13. 13 Effective Course Design Students Goals and Objectives Assessment ABET EC 2000 Bloom’s Taxonomy Course-specific goals & objectives Cooperative learning Lectures Labs Other experiences Classroom assessment techniques Tests Instruction Other measures Technology (Felder & Brent, 1999)

14. Lila M. Smith

15. Pedago-pathologies Amnesia Fantasia Inertia Lee Shulman – MSU Med School – PBL Approach (late 60s – early 70s); Stanford University, Past President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of College Teaching Shulman, Lee S. 1999. Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4), 11-17.

16. 16 What do we do about these pathologies? – Lee Shulman Activity Reflection Collaboration Passion Shulman, Lee S. 1999. Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4), 11-17.

17. Lila M. Smith

18. 18 Pedagogies of Engagement

19. January 2, 2009—Science, Vol. 323 www.sciencemag.org Calls for evidence-based teaching practices MIT & Harvard – Engaged Pedagogy January 13, 2009—New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?em

20. http://web.mit.edu/edtech/casestudies/teal.html#video

21. http://www.ncsu.edu/PER/scaleup.html

22. Cooperative Learning Positive Interdependence Individual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing

23. Cooperative Learning Research Support Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. 1998. Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30 (4), 26-35. Over 300 Experimental Studies First study conducted in 1924 High Generalizability Multiple Outcomes Outcomes 1. Achievement and retention 2. Critical thinking and higher-level reasoning 3. Differentiated views of others 4. Accurate understanding of others' perspectives 5. Liking for classmates and teacher 6.Liking for subject areas 7. Teamwork skills January 2005March 2007

24. Levels of Inquiry (Levels 1, 2 & 3 from Shulman & Hutchings) Source: Streveler, R., Borrego, M. and Smith, K.A. 2007. Moving from the “Scholarship of Teaching and Learning” to “Educational Research:” An Example from Engineering. To Improve the Academy, Vol. 25, 139-149. Level 0 Teacher –Teach as taught Level 1 Effective Teacher –Teach using accepted teaching theories and practices Level 2 Scholarly Teacher –Assesses performance and makes improvements Level 3 Scholarship of Teaching and Learning –Engages in educational experimentation, shares results Level 4 Disciplinary Education Researcher –Conducts educational research, publishes archival papers

25. 25 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-804.doc)

26. Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome). Key Concepts Positive Interdependence Individual and Group Accountability Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction Teamwork Skills Group Processing

27. 27 Individual & Group Accountability Individual exams Individual responsibility within a small group – grade based on individual & group work Evaluate one another (peer evaluation) –formatively Each student takes a turn presenting within small grroup Students report out on what they did Assigning roles Role play Randomly calling on people Welcome/embrace diversity Self-assessment – rubric (e.g.performance review) Monitoring / individual oral exam

28. 28 http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdf

29. 29 Book Ends on a Class Session

30. 30 Advance Organizer “The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.@ David Ausubel - Educational psychology: A cognitive approach, 1968.

31. Book Ends on a Class Session 1.Advance Organizer 2.Formulate-Share-Listen-Create (Turn- to-your-neighbor) -- repeated every 10- 12 minutes 3.Session Summary (Minute Paper) 1.What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during this session? 2.What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session? 3.What was the “muddiest” point in this session?

32. 32 Advance Organizer “The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.” David Ausubel - Educational psychology: A cognitive approach, 1968.

33. 33 Quick Thinks Reorder the steps Paraphrase the idea Correct the error Support a statement Select the response Johnston, S. & Cooper,J. 1997. Quick thinks: Active- thinking in lecture classes and televised instruction. Cooperative learning and college teaching, 8(1), 2-7.

34. 34 Formulate-Share-Listen-Create Informal Cooperative Learning Group Introductory Pair Discussion of a FOCUS QUESTION 1.Formulate your response to the question individually 2.Share your answer with a partner 3.Listen carefully to your partner's answer 4.Work together to Create a new answer through discussion

35. 35 Minute Paper What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during this session? What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session? What was the “muddiest” point in this session? Give an example or application Explain in your own words... Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

36. 36 Session Summary (Minute Paper) Reflect on the session: 1. Most interesting, valuable, useful thing you learned. 2. Things that helped you learn. 3. Question, comments, suggestions. 4.Pace: Too slow 1.... 5 Too fast 5.Relevance: Little 1... 5 Lots 6.Instructional Format: Ugh 1... 5 Ah

37. 37 Q4 – Pace: Too slow 1.... 5 Too fast (3.3) Q5 – Relevance: Little 1... 5 Lots (4.2) Q6 – Format: Ugh 1... 5 Ah (4.4) MOT 8221 – Spring 2009 – Session 1

38. 38 Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with Concept Tests Physics Peer Instruction - Eric Mazur - Harvard – http://galileo.harvard.edu Richard Hake – http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/ Chemistry Chemistry ConcepTests - UW Madison www.chem.wisc.edu/~concept Video: Making Lectures Interactive with ConcepTests ModularChem Consortium – http://mc2.cchem.berkeley.edu/ STEMTEC Video: How Change Happens: Breaking the “Teach as You Were Taught” Cycle – Films for the Humanities & Sciences – www.films.com Harvard Thinking Together, From Questions to Concepts Interactive Teaching in Physics & Interactive Teaching DVD: Promoting Better Learning Using Peer Instruction and Just-In-Time Teaching: Derek Bok Center www.fas.harvard.edu/~bok_cen/

39. 39 The “Hake” Plot of FCI Pretest (Percent) 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 20.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00 ALS SDI WP PI(HU) ASU(nc) ASU(c) HU WP* UMn Traditional X UMn Cooperative Groups X UMn-CL+PS

40. Richard Hake (Interactive engagement vs traditional methods) http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/ Traditional (lecture) Interactive (active/cooperative) = Concept Inventory Gain/Total

41. 41

42. 42 Physics (Mechanics) Concepts: The Force Concept Inventory (FCI) A 30 item multiple choice test to probe student's understanding of basic concepts in mechanics. The choice of topics is based on careful thought about what the fundamental issues and concepts are in Newtonian dynamics. Uses common speech rather than cueing specific physics principles. The distractors (wrong answers) are based on students' common inferences.

43. Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Can be used at any time Can be short term and ad hoc May be used to break up a long lecture Provides an opportunity for students to process material they have been listening to (Cognitive Rehearsal) Are especially effective in large lectures Include "book ends" procedure Are not as effective as Formal Cooperative Learning or Cooperative Base Groups

44. 44 Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom Informal Cooperative Learning Groups Formal Cooperative Learning Groups Cooperative Base Groups See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-804.doc)

45. Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups

46. 46 http://www.aacu.org/advocacy/leap/documents/Re8097abcombined.pdf

47. 47 Top Three Main Engineering Work Activities Engineering Total Design – 36% Computer applications – 31% Management – 29% Civil/Architectural Management – 45% Design – 39% Computer applications – 20% Burton, L., Parker, L, & LeBold, W. 1998. U.S. engineering career trends. ASEE Prism, 7(9), 18-21.

48. 48 Teamwork Skills Communication Listening and Persuading Decision Making Conflict Management Leadership Trust and Loyalty

49. 49 Ideo's five-point model for strategizing by design: Hit the Streets Recruit T-Shaped People Build to Think The Prototype Tells a Story Design Is Never Done Design Thinking Discipline Thinking Tom Friedman Horizontalize Ourselves CQ+PQ>IQ AAC&U College Learning For the New Global Century

50. 50 http://www.stanford.edu/group/dschool/big_picture/our_vision.html

51. Design team failure is usually due to failed team dynamics (Leifer, Koseff & Lenshow, 1995). It’s the soft stuff that’s hard, the hard stuff is easy (Doug Wilde, quoted in Leifer, 1997) Professional Skills ( Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J., “The ABET Professional Skills-Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed?” Journal of Engineering Education, Vo. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 41–55.)

52. 52 Teamwork

53. 53 Characteristics of Effective Teams They focus on creating/producing an “amazing” product, service, etc. Diversity Identification of strengths – identification of weakness – opportunity to learn/improve Facilitative leadership Curiosity Good listening Self critique Willing to share Motivated Check ego at door No slackers – individual accountability Strong leadership Respect Engage all members Success driven Agreement on goal/purpose – clearly stated Mutually developed, accepted goal First ideas are not always your best Comunication Focusing on task and not individual personalities Organization involved, especially holding people accountability People do homework before and come prepared

54. A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable SMALL NUMBER COMPLEMENTARY SKILLS COMMON PURPOSE & PERFORMANCE GOALS COMMON APPROACH MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY --Katzenbach & Smith (1993) The Wisdom of Teams

55. 55 Hackman – Leading Teams Real Team Compelling Direction Enabling Structure Supportive Organizational Context Available Expert Coaching https://research.wjh.harvard.edu/TDS/ Team Diagnostic Survey (TDS)

56. Team Charter Team name, membership, and roles Team Mission Statement Anticipated results (goals) Specific tactical objectives Ground rules/Guiding principles for team participation Shared expectations/aspirations

57. Code of Cooperation EVERY member is responsible for the team ’ s progress and success. Attend all team meetings and be on time. Come prepared. Carry out assignments on schedule. Listen to and show respect for the contributions of other members; be an active listener. CONSTRUCTIVELY criticize ideas, not persons. Resolve conflicts constructively, Pay attention, avoid disruptive behavior. Avoid disruptive side conversations. Only one person speaks at a time. Everyone participates, no one dominates. Be succinct, avoid long anecdotes and examples. No rank in the room. Respect those not present. Ask questions when you do not understand. Attend to your personal comfort needs at any time but minimize team disruption. HAVE FUN!! ? Adapted from Boeing Aircraft Group Team Member Training Manual

58. 58 Ten Commandments: An Affective Code of Cooperation Help each other be right, not wrong. Look for ways to make new ideas work, not for reasons they won't. If in doubt, check it out! Don't make negative assumptions about each other. Help each other win, and take pride in each other's victories. Speak positively about each other and about your organization at every opportunity. Maintain a positive mental attitude no matter what the circumstances. Act with initiative and courage, as if it all depends on you. Do everything with enthusiasm; it's contagious. Whatever you want; give it away. Don't lose faith. Have fun Ford Motor Company

59. 59

60. Group Processing Plus/Delta Format Plus (+) Things That Group Did Well Delta (Δ) Things Group Could Improve

61. 61 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

62. Formal Cooperative Learning – Types of Tasks 1.Jigsaw – Learning new conceptual/procedural material 2.Peer Composition or Editing 3.Reading Comprehension/Interpretation 4.Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation 5.Review/Correct Homework 6.Constructive Academic Controversy 7.Group Tests

63. 63 Challenged-Based Learning Problem-based learning Case-based learning Project-based learning Learning by design Inquiry learning Anchored instruction John Bransford, Nancy Vye and Helen Bateman. Creating High-Quality Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn

64. Challenge-Based Instruction with the Legacy Cycle Legacy Cycle The Challenges Generate Ideas Multiple Perspectives Research & Revise Test Your Mettle Go Public 64 https://repo.vanth.org/portal/public-content/star-legacy-cycle/star-legacy-cycle

65. 65 Problem-Based Learning Problem posed Identify what we need to know Learn it Apply it START

66. 66 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.

67. 67 http://www.udel.edu/pbl/

68. 68 Cooperative Base Groups Are Heterogeneous Are Long Term (at least one quarter or semester) Are Small (3-5 members) Are for support May meet at the beginning of each session or may meet between sessions Review for quizzes, tests, etc. together Share resources, references, etc. for individual projects Provide a means for covering for absentees

69. 69 Design and Implementation of Cooperative Learning – Resources Design Framework – How People Learn (HPL) –Creating High Quality Learning Environments (Bransford, Vye & Bateman) -- http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/ http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/ Design & Backward Design Process (Felder & Brent, Fink and Wiggins & McTighe) –Pellegrino – Rethinking and redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment: What contemporary research and theory suggests. http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm –Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M. 2009. Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, 19-32. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117 Content Resources –Donald, Janet. 2002. Learning to think: Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. –Middendorf, Joan and Pace, David. 2004. Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98. Pedagogies of Engagement - Instructional Format explanation and exercise to model format and to engage workshop participants –Cooperative Learning (Johnson, Johnson & Smith) Smith web site – www.ce.umn.edu/~smithwww.ce.umn.edu/~smith –University of Delaware PBL web site – www.udel.edu/pblwww.udel.edu/pbl –PKAL – Pedagogies of Engagement – http://www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagementSummit.cfm