Closing the 2-Sigma Gap
Eight Strategies to Replicate
One-to-One Tutoring
in Blended Learning
David W. Denton
David A. Wic...
Closing the 2 Sigma Gap
Definitions
(Bloom, 1984)
Effects
(Bloom, 1984)
How can instructors replicate
characteristics of one-to-one tutoring in
blended learning courses?
Variables for Considerat...
Eight Strategies
	
  
Improving	
  instruc/onal	
  materials	
  
1	
  Quan/ty	
  of	
  Instruc/on	
  
2	
  Cues	
  and	
  ...
Improving Instructional Materials
1	
  Quan/ty	
  of	
  instruc/on	
  
2	
  Cues	
  and	
  explana/ons	
  
1 Quantity of Instruction
The	
  amount	
  of	
  guidance,	
  prepara/on,	
  &	
  coaching	
  provided	
  to	
  students	
...
Improving Quantity of Instruction
Online	
  resources	
  showing	
  what	
  or	
  how	
  
	
  
Face	
  /me	
  to	
  coach	...
2 Cues and Explanations
Informa/on	
  or	
  ques/ons	
  shared	
  by	
  instructor	
  or	
  
students	
  to	
  help	
  sca...
Improving Cues and Explanations
Instruc/onal	
  decision-­‐making	
  tree	
  
	
  
	
  
Face	
  /me	
  to	
  understand	
 ...
Enhancing Peer Interactions
3	
  Coopera/ve	
  learning	
  
4	
  Class	
  environment	
  
3 Cooperative Learning
Use	
  of	
  small	
  groups	
  so	
  that	
  students	
  work	
  
together	
  to	
  maximize	
  th...
Cogni/ve	
  Presence	
  
(Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001)
Collaborate	
  on	
  
Deliverable	
  
(Charter,	
  E...
Improving Cooperative Learning
1.  Choose	
  an	
  appropriate	
  small	
  group	
  project	
  
2.  Iden/fy	
  suitable	
 ...
4 Class Environment
Communica/on	
  
Characteris/cs	
  of	
  an	
  Effec/ve	
  LMS	
  
(Elias, 2010; Higgins et al., 2005)
Improving Communication through
LMS Organization
Equitable	
  use	
  
All	
  content	
  online	
  
	
  
	
  
Simple	
  and...
Simple and Intuitive
	
  
Organize	
  content	
  
Labels	
  
Considering Student Differences
5	
  Tutorial	
  instruc/on	
  
6	
  Feedback	
  
5 Tutorial Instruction
Individualized	
  instruc/on	
  that	
  supports	
  regular	
  
classroom	
  instruc/on	
  
Improving Tutorial Instruction
Replace	
  or	
  enhance	
  lectures	
  with	
  short,	
  interac/ve	
  online	
  tutorials...
6 Feedback
Informa/on	
  provided	
  by	
  an	
  agent	
  (e.g.,	
  teacher,	
  
peer,	
  book,	
  parent,	
  self,	
  exp...
Characteristics of Effective Feedback
Performance	
  criteria,	
  direc/on	
  for	
  improving	
  
	
  
Opportunity	
  for...
Improving Feedback
Developed	
  
Conversa/onal	
  tone	
  
Opening	
  or	
  closing	
  comment	
  
Support	
  comments	
  ...
Engaging Higher Mental Processes
7	
  Metacogni/ve	
  training	
  
8	
  Goals	
  
7 Metacognitive Training
Metacogni/on	
  -­‐	
  engaging	
  higher	
  mental	
  processes	
  involves	
  metacogni/ve	
  
...
Kinds	
  of	
  Metacogni/ve	
  Knowledge	
  
Strategy	
  
	
  
Task	
  
	
  
How,	
  when,	
  why,	
  where	
  to	
  
appl...
Improving Metacognitive Training
Students	
  engaging	
  in	
  blended	
  learning	
  struggle	
  with	
  managing	
  
/me...
8 Goals
Goal	
  -­‐	
  the	
  end	
  toward	
  which	
  effort	
  is	
  directed	
  
Outcome	
  -­‐	
  something	
  that	
 ...
Characteristics of Goals
Fact,	
  idea,	
  principle,	
  capability,	
  skill,	
  concept,	
  
technique,	
  value,	
  fee...
Improving Goals
Reflec/ve	
  Wri/ng	
  
	
  
1.	
  Cita/on	
  of	
  goal	
  
2.	
  Presenta/on	
  of	
  evidence	
  
	
  
3...
Eight Strategies
	
  
Improving	
  instruc/onal	
  materials	
  
1	
  Quan/ty	
  of	
  Instruc/on	
  
2	
  Cues	
  and	
  ...
References
Abdulla,	
  D.	
  (2012).	
  Aktudes	
  of	
  college	
  students	
  enrolled	
  in	
  2-­‐year	
  health	
  ca...
Closing the 2-Sigma Gap: Eight Strategies to Replicate One-to-One Tutoring in Blended Learning
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Closing the 2-Sigma Gap: Eight Strategies to Replicate One-to-One Tutoring in Blended Learning

549 views

Published on

David Denton (Seattle Pacific University, USA)
David Wicks (Seattle Pacific University, USA)
Vicki Eveland (Seattle Pacific University, USA)

Benjamin Bloom, probably best known for Bloom's Taxonomy, contributed significant research and theory on a wide array of educational topics, including the effects of tutoring on student achievement. In 1984, Bloom wrote an article titled The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring. Bloom found that one-to-one tutoring improved student performance two standard deviations above the mean on academic measures in comparison to students taught in conventional classrooms.
These findings are unsurprising to most educators. However, the critical question derived from Bloom's (1984) research is whether teachers in conventional classrooms can replicate characteristics of one-to-one tutoring.
The replication question persists today, regardless of level or subject area. A significant pursuit of all educators is to use the most effective instructional practices available in order to raise student achievement. One way to organize effective practice is through characteristics of teaching and learning that replicate one-to-one tutoring. Examples that qualify this pursuit in current terms include differentiated instruction and adaptive learning systems such as Khan Academy (Office of Educational Technology, 2013).
Finding ways to more closely approximate characteristics of one-to-one tutoring in conventional settings inspires educators to experiment with alternative instructional formats. One of these is blended learning, which combines elements of online, classroom, and mobile engagement techniques (Strauss, 2012). However, some have suggested that blended learning is a fad, and subject to the same kind of waning interest as other educational innovations (Strauss, 2012).
Implementing and sustaining educational innovation, such as blended learning, depends on the use of effective instructional strategies. Characteristics of one-to-one tutoring provide a set of benchmark activities for identifying and organizing these types of effective practices within the context of blended learning environments.

Instructors choose from a wide variety of instructional practices to meet their objectives. However, not all practices have the same effect. Selecting and implementing the most effective strategies is critical, regardless of learning venue. One framework for organizing blended learning methods is through one-to-one tutoring, especially since instructional practices characteristic of tutoring have an enormous effect on student achievement.

Presenters in this informational session summarize ways instructors merge characteristics of one-to-one tutoring, along with example strategies to enhance blended learning. Participants integrate preferred methods according to their contexts through discussion and small group collaboration.€ƒ

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
549
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Closing the 2-Sigma Gap: Eight Strategies to Replicate One-to-One Tutoring in Blended Learning

  1. 1. Closing the 2-Sigma Gap Eight Strategies to Replicate One-to-One Tutoring in Blended Learning David W. Denton David A. Wicks Vicki Eveland Seattle Pacific University Sloan Consortium Blended Learning Conference, 2013
  2. 2. Closing the 2 Sigma Gap
  3. 3. Definitions (Bloom, 1984)
  4. 4. Effects (Bloom, 1984)
  5. 5. How can instructors replicate characteristics of one-to-one tutoring in blended learning courses? Variables for Consideration Improving instructional materials Enhancing peer interactions Considering student differences Engaging higher mental processes
  6. 6. Eight Strategies   Improving  instruc/onal  materials   1  Quan/ty  of  Instruc/on   2  Cues  and  Explana/ons     Enhancing  peer  interac/ons   3  Coopera/ve  Learning   4  Class  Environment     Considering  student  differences   5  Tutorial  Instruc/on   6  Feedback     Engaging  higher  mental  processes   7  Metacogni/ve  Training   8  Goals  
  7. 7. Improving Instructional Materials 1  Quan/ty  of  instruc/on   2  Cues  and  explana/ons  
  8. 8. 1 Quantity of Instruction The  amount  of  guidance,  prepara/on,  &  coaching  provided  to  students  in  a  course     Blended  learning  offers  the  opportunity  for  increased  quan/ty  of  instruc/on     BeOer  prac/ces   Concise  organiza/on  of  materials,  management   Differen/ate  between  online  and  face-­‐to-­‐face  components   Realis/c  expecta/ons  regarding  complexity  of  content   Accountability,  feedback,  and  reflec/on   Metacogni/ve  training   (Abdullah, 2012; Nissen & Tea, 2012)
  9. 9. Improving Quantity of Instruction Online  resources  showing  what  or  how     Face  /me  to  coach  students  through  applica/on     Linking  students  to  addi/onal  resources     Access  to  review  material  for  par/cularly  challenging  content     Providing  resources  and  instruc/on  for  a  student  to  access  at  convenience  
  10. 10. 2 Cues and Explanations Informa/on  or  ques/ons  shared  by  instructor  or   students  to  help  scaffold  understanding  
  11. 11. Improving Cues and Explanations Instruc/onal  decision-­‐making  tree       Face  /me  to  understand  nonverbal   expressions       Asynchronous  discussions  to  allow  /me   to  reflect  prior  to  responding       Web  conference  to  understand  nonverbal   expressions  if  face  /me  isn't  available   (Frey  &  Fisher,  2010)  
  12. 12. Enhancing Peer Interactions 3  Coopera/ve  learning   4  Class  environment  
  13. 13. 3 Cooperative Learning Use  of  small  groups  so  that  students  work   together  to  maximize  their  own  and  each   others'  learning   (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991)
  14. 14. Cogni/ve  Presence   (Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001) Collaborate  on   Deliverable   (Charter,  Essay,   or  Presenta/on)   Complete   Deliverable,   Reflect  on   process       Review   Collabora/ve   Script  Ques/ons   Post  to  Personal   Area,  Outline   Collabora/ve   Response   Post  to  Personal   Area,  Outline   Collabora/ve   Response   Review   Collabora/ve   Script  Ques/ons   Complete   Deliverable,   Reflect  on   process       Collaborate  on   Deliverable   (Charter,  Essay,   or  Presenta/on)  
  15. 15. Improving Cooperative Learning 1.  Choose  an  appropriate  small  group  project   2.  Iden/fy  suitable  collabora/ve  tools   3.  Incorporate  a  collabora/ve  script   4.  Organize  the  project  with  phases  for  major  milestones   5.  Include  specific  deadlines  for  individual  and  group  work   6.  Form  homogenous  or  heterogeneous  teams   7.  Provide  training  for  technology  and  collabora/on  techniques   8.  Assess  evidence  of  individual-­‐group  par/cipa/on  acer  each  phase  (process)   9.  Request  student  reflec/on  on  collabora/ve  process  acer  each  phase   10.  Assess  deliverables  or  products  acer  each  phase  (product)   (Wicks, Lumpe, Denton, 2012)
  16. 16. 4 Class Environment Communica/on   Characteris/cs  of  an  Effec/ve  LMS   (Elias, 2010; Higgins et al., 2005)
  17. 17. Improving Communication through LMS Organization Equitable  use   All  content  online       Simple  and  intui/ve   Interface   Naviga/on   Tolerance  for  error   Edit  posts   Resubmission     Instruc/onal  climate   Regular  email  contact   Individual  consulta/on  
  18. 18. Simple and Intuitive   Organize  content   Labels  
  19. 19. Considering Student Differences 5  Tutorial  instruc/on   6  Feedback  
  20. 20. 5 Tutorial Instruction Individualized  instruc/on  that  supports  regular   classroom  instruc/on  
  21. 21. Improving Tutorial Instruction Replace  or  enhance  lectures  with  short,  interac/ve  online  tutorials     Provide  background  material,  example  problems,  problem-­‐solving  opportuni/es     Supply  immediate  automated  feedback     Include  face-­‐to-­‐face  tutorials  using  PIM   (Garrison & Vaughan, 2011)
  22. 22. 6 Feedback Informa/on  provided  by  an  agent  (e.g.,  teacher,   peer,  book,  parent,  self,  experience)  regarding   aspects  of  one’s  performance  or  understanding   (Hattie & Timperley 2007)
  23. 23. Characteristics of Effective Feedback Performance  criteria,  direc/on  for  improving     Opportunity  for  correc/ons     Efficient,  /mely  delivery     Customized     Developed  
  24. 24. Improving Feedback Developed   Conversa/onal  tone   Opening  or  closing  comment   Support  comments  throughout   Avoids  iden/fying  same  error   Beyond  brief  comments  "good"   (McGrath, Taylor, & Pychyl, 2011)
  25. 25. Engaging Higher Mental Processes 7  Metacogni/ve  training   8  Goals  
  26. 26. 7 Metacognitive Training Metacogni/on  -­‐  engaging  higher  mental  processes  involves  metacogni/ve   and  cogni/ve  dimensions     Metacogni/on  focuses  on  the  ac/ve  par/cipa/on  of  the  individual  in  his  or   her  thinking  process   (Stewart and Landine 1995)
  27. 27. Kinds  of  Metacogni/ve  Knowledge   Strategy     Task     How,  when,  why,  where  to   apply  strategy     Self     Learner  awareness  of   strengths  and  weaknesses    
  28. 28. Improving Metacognitive Training Students  engaging  in  blended  learning  struggle  with  managing   /me,  priori/zing  ac/vi/es,  and  organizing  learning  materials  so   they  may  need  explicit  training  in  all  of  the  areas  of   metacogni/ve  knowledge   (Yang, 2012)
  29. 29. 8 Goals Goal  -­‐  the  end  toward  which  effort  is  directed   Outcome  -­‐  something  that  follows  as  a  result   Objec/ve  -­‐  an  aim,  goal,  or  end  of  ac/on  
  30. 30. Characteristics of Goals Fact,  idea,  principle,  capability,  skill,  concept,   technique,  value,  feeling   Specific   Self-­‐assess   Evidence  
  31. 31. Improving Goals Reflec/ve  Wri/ng     1.  Cita/on  of  goal   2.  Presenta/on  of  evidence     3.  Asser/on  of  evidence-­‐competence     4.  Summary  of  what  was  learned     5.  Iden/fica/on  of  future  steps   (Guldberg & Pilkington, 2007)
  32. 32. Eight Strategies   Improving  instruc/onal  materials   1  Quan/ty  of  Instruc/on   2  Cues  and  Explana/ons     Enhancing  peer  interac/ons   3  Coopera/ve  Learning   4  Class  Environment     Considering  student  differences   5  Tutorial  Instruc/on   6  Feedback     Engaging  higher  mental  processes   7  Metacogni/ve  Training   8  Goals  
  33. 33. References Abdulla,  D.  (2012).  Aktudes  of  college  students  enrolled  in  2-­‐year  health  care  programs  towards  online  learning.  Computers  &  Educa0on,  59(4),  1215-­‐1223.   Bloom,  B.  (1984).  The  2  sigma  problem:  The  search  for  methods  of  group  instruc/on  as  effec/ve  as  one-­‐to-­‐one  tutoring.  Educa0onal  Researcher  13(6),  4-­‐16.   Cowan,  J.  E.  (2012).  Strategies  for  developing  a  community  of  prac/ce:  Nine  years  of  lessons  learned  in  a  hybrid  technology  educa/on  master's  program.  Techtrends,   56(1),  12-­‐18.   Elisa,  T.  Universal  instruc/onal  design  principles  for  Moodle.  Interna0onal  Review  of  Research  in  Open  and  Distance  Learning,  11(2),  110-­‐124.   Frey,  N.,  &  Fisher,  D.  (2010).  Iden/fying  instruc/onal  moves  during  guided  learning.  The  Reading  Teacher,  64(2)   Garrison,  D.  R.,  &  Vaughan,  N.  D.  (2011).  Blended  Learning  in  Higher  Educa0on:  Framework,  Principles,  and  Guidelines.  Wiley  Publishing.   Guldberg,  K.  &  Pilkington,  R.  (2007).  Tutor  roles  in  facilita/ng  reflec/on  on  prac/ce  through  online  discussion.  Educa0onal  Technology  and  Society  10(1),  61-­‐72.   Hake,  J.  &  Timperley,  N.  (2007).  The  power  of  feedback.  Review  of  Educa0onal  Research,  77(1),  81-­‐112.  doi:  10.3102/003465430298487   Hew,  K.,  &  Cheung,  W.  (2012).  Students'  use  of  asynchronous  voice  discussion  in  a  blended-­‐learning  environment:  A  study  of  two  undergraduate  classes.  Electronic   Journal  of  E-­‐Learning,  10(4),  360-­‐367.   Higgins,    S.,  et  al.  (2005).  The  impact  of  school  environments:  A  literature  review.  The  Centre  for  Learning  and  Teaching  School  of  Educa/on,  Communica/on  and   Language  Science.  University  of  Newcastle.   Johnson,  D.W.,  Johnson,  R.  T.,  and  Smith,  K.  A.    (1991).    Coopera/ve  learning:    Increasing  college  faculty  instruc/onal  produc/vity.    ASHE-­‐ERIC  Report  on  Higher   Educa0on.    Washington,  DC:  George  Washington  University.   Kim,  J.  (2012).  A  study  on  learners'  percep/onal  typology  and  rela/onships  among  the  learner's  types,  characteris/cs,  and  academic  achievement  in  a  blended  e-­‐ educa/on  environment.  Computers  &  Educa0on,  59(2),  304-­‐315.   McGrath,  A.  L.,  Taylor,  A.,  &  Pychyl,  T.  A.  (2011).  Wri/ng  helpful  feedback:  The  influence  of  feedback  type  on  students’  percep/ons  and  wri/ng  performance.   Canadian  Journal  for  the  Scholarship  of  Teaching  and  Learning,  2(2),  1-­‐16.   Nissen,  E.,  &  Tea,  E.  (2012).  Going  blended:  New  challenges  for  second  genera/on  L2  tutors.  Computer  Assisted  Language  Learning,  25(2),  145-­‐163.   Office  of  Educa/onal  Technology  (2013).  Expanding  evidence  approaches  for  learning  in  a  digital  world.  United  Stated  Department  of  Educa/on.  Retrieved  from   hOp://www.ed.gov/edblogs/technology/files/2012/12/Expanding_Evidence_Approaches_DRAFT.pdf   Rourke,  L.,  Anderson,  T.  Garrison,  D.  R.,  &  Archer,  W.  (2001).  Assessing  social  presence  in  asynchronous,  text-­‐based  computer  conferencing.  Journal  of  Distance   Educa0on,  14(3),  51-­‐70.   Stewart,  J.,  &  Landine,  J.  (1995).  Study  skills  from  a  metacogni/ve  perspec/ve.  Guidance  &  Counseling,  11(1),  16-­‐20.   Strauss,  V.  (September,  2012).  Three  fears  about  blended  learning.  The  Washington  Post.   Wicks,  D.,  Lumpe,  A.,  Denton,  D.  (2012).  Ten  Strategies  to  Enhance  Collabora/ve  Learning  in  an  Online  Course.  18th  Annual  Sloan-­‐C  Interna0onal  Conference  on   Online  Learning.  Orlando,  FL.   Wilson,  G.,  &  Randall,  M.  (2012).  The  implementa/on  and  evalua/on  of  a  new  learning  space:  A  pilot  study.  Research  in  Learning  Technology,  20(2),  1-­‐17.   Yang,  Y.  (2012).  Blended  learning  for  college  students  with  English  reading  difficul/es.  Computer  Assisted  Language  Learning,  25(5),  393-­‐410.  

×