Introduction to Cooperative Learning and Foundations of - PowerPoint Presentation

Presentation on theme: "Introduction to Cooperative Learning and Foundations of"— Presentation transcript

Slide1

Introduction to Cooperative Learning and Foundations of Design of High Performance Learning Environments

Karl A. Smith

STEM Education Center / Technological Leadership Institute / Civil Engineering – University of Minnesota &

Engineering Education – Purdue University

ksmith@umn.edu - http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith

King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals

Design and Implementation of Cooperative Learning

August 19-21, 2013Slide2

2

Session 1 LayoutWelcome & OverviewCooperative Learning BasicsCourse Design FoundationsDesign and ImplementationSlide3

Overall GoalBuild your repertoire of cooperative learning strategies as well as skills and confidence for implementing them

3Slide4

4

Workshop ObjectivesParticipants will be able to :Describe key features of cooperative learning and effective, interactive strategies for facilitating learningSummarize research on How People Learn (HPL)Describe key features of the Understanding by Design

(

UbD

) process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment – Pedagogy

Explain key features of and rationale

for

Cooperative

Learning

Identify

connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs

Participants will begin applying key elements to the design on a course, class session or learning module Slide5

Reflection and DialogueIndividually reflect on Effective, Interactive Strategies for Facilitating Learning

. Write for about 1 minuteContext? Subject, Year, School/DepartmentStructure/Procedure? Outcome? Evidence of SuccessDiscuss with your neighbor for about 3 minutesSelect Story, Comment, Question, etc. that you would like to present to the whole group if you are randomly selectedSlide6

Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate EducationGood practice in undergraduate education:

Encourages student-faculty contactEncourages cooperation among studentsEncourages active learningGives prompt feedbackEmphasizes time on taskCommunicates high expectationsRespects diverse talents and ways of learning6

Chickering

&

Gamson

, June, 1987

http://learningcommons.evergreen.edu/pdf/fall1987.pdfSlide7

Clicker Usage7

Never (A)

Occasionally (B)

Frequently (C)

Always (D)

Considering it (E)

35 of 37Slide8

Process MetallurgyDissolution Kinetics – liquid-solid interface

Iron Ore Desliming – solid-solid interfaceMetal-oxide reduction roasting – gas-solid interfaceSlide9

Dissolution KineticsTheory – Governing Equation for Mass Transport

Research – rotating disk Practice – leaching of silver bearing metallic copperSlide10

First Teaching ExperiencePractice – Third-year course in metallurgical reactions – thermodynamics and kineticsSlide11

Lila M. SmithSlide12

Engineering Education

Practice – Third-year course in metallurgical reactions – thermodynamics and kineticsResearch – ? Theory – ?

Theory

Research

Evidence

PracticeSlide13

University of Minnesota College of EducationSocial, Psychological and Philosophical Foundations of Education

Statistics, Measurement, Research MethodologyAssessment and EvaluationLearning and Cognitive PsychologyKnowledge Acquisition, Artificial Intelligence, Expert SystemsDevelopment TheoriesMotivation TheoriesSocial psychology of learning – student – student interactionSlide14

Lila M. SmithSlide15

Cooperative LearningTheory – Social Interdependence – Lewin – Deutsch – Johnson & Johnson

Research – Randomized Design Field ExperimentsPractice – Formal Teams/Professor’s Role

Theory

Research

Evidence

PracticeSlide16

Lewin’s ContributionsFounded field of social psychology

Action ResearchForce-Field analysisB = f(P,E)Social Interdependence Theory“There is nothing so practical as a good theory”Slide17

Cooperative Learning

•Positive Interdependence

•Individual and Group Accountability

•Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction

•Teamwork Skills

•Group Processing

[*First edition 1991]Slide18

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 2005

March 2007Slide19

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

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdfSlide20

What is your experience with cooperative learning?

20

35 of 37

Little 1 (A)

Between 1&3 (B)

Moderate 3 (C)

Between 3&5 (D)

Extensive 5 (E)Slide21

“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;

Former Dean

, Provost and President of the University of MichiganSlide22

What is your experience with course (re)design?

22

32

of

37Slide23

What do you feel are important considerations about course (re) design?

What are challenges you have faced with course (re) design?What do you already know about course design? [Background Knowledge Survey]Short Answer QuestionsSlide24

No

Yes

Yes

Good Theory/

Poor Practice

Good Theory & Good Practice

No

Good Practice/ Poor Theory

Sources:

Bransford

, Brown & Cocking. 1999.

How people learn.

National Academy Press

.

Wiggins, G. &

McTighe

, J. 2005.

Understanding by design, 2ed

. ASCD.

Science of Instruction (

UbD

)

Science of Learning

(HPL)

Design FoundationsSlide25

What is your level familiarity with learning theories (e.g.,HPL) & instruction (e.g., UbD) theories?

25

32

of

37Slide26

Part I – Introduction1 Learning: From Speculation to Science 3Part II – Learners and Learning2 How Experts Differ from Novices 31

3 Learning and Transfer 514 How Children Learn 795 Mind and Brain 114Part III – Teachers and Teaching6 The Design of Learning Environments 1317 Effective Teaching: Examples in History, Mathematics, and Science 1558 Teacher Learning 1909 Technology to Support Learning 206Part IV – Future Directions for the Science of Learning10 Conclusions 23311 Next Steps for Research 24826

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6160Slide27

27

How People Learn (HPL)Expertise Implies (Ch. 2):a set of cognitive and metacognitive skillsan organized body of knowledge that is deep and contextualizedan ability to notice patterns of information in a new situationflexibility in retrieving and applying that knowledge to a new problem

Bransford, Brown & Cocking. 1999.

How people learn.

National Academy Press.

HPL FrameworkSlide28

28

Key Resource

http://books.google.com/books?id=N2EfKlyUN4QC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false

28Slide29

29

Understanding by Design Wiggins & McTighe (1997, 2005)

Stage 1. Identify Desired Results

Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence

Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences

and Instruction

Overall:

Are the desired results, assessments, and learning activities ALIGNED?

From: Wiggins, Grant and

McTighe

, Jay. 1997.

Understanding by Design

. Alexandria, VA: ASCDSlide30

Backward Design

Context

Content

Assessment

Pedagogy

C & A & P

Alignment?

End

Start

Yes

No

Understanding by Design (Wiggins &

McTighe

, 2005)

Content-Assessment-Pedagogy (CAP) Design Process Flowchart

30

Streveler, Smith & Pilotte (2012)Slide31

Understanding by Design vs. Engineering Design

Identify the Desired Results

Determine Acceptable Evidence

Plan Learning Experiences

Are the desired results, assessments, and learning activities ALIGNED?

Develop or use established metrics to measure against outcomes

Determine requirements/

specifications

Plan and develop process,

system, etc. to implement

31Slide32

Bransford

, Vye and Bateman – Creating High Quality Learning Environments Slide33

Students prior knowledge can help or hinder learning

How student organize knowledge influences how they learn and apply what they knowStudents’ motivation determines, directs, and sustains what they do to learnTo develop mastery, students must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned Goal-directed practice coupled with targeted feedback enhances the quality of students’ learningStudents’ current level of development interacts with the social, emotional, and intellectual climate of the course to impact learningTo become self-directed learners, students must learn to monitor and adjust their approach to learningSlide34

34

34Related Integrated Course Design ModelFink, L.D. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses

.

Jossey

-Bass

Fink, L.D. 2003. A Self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning. http://www.deefinkandassociates.com/GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdfSlide35

35

35

A Self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning

L. Dee Fink. 2003.

Creating significant learning experiences

. Jossey-Bass.Slide36

Your turnReview your course syllabus

and Select a topic, class session or learning module you would like to (re)design especially by incorporating cooperative learning36Slide37

37

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.

Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast

Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots

Instructional Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 AhSlide38

Q4 – Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (2.8)

Q5 – Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (3.6)Q6 – Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (3.9)

Clarkson University –

Session 1

(6/3/13)Slide39

39