• Save
Problem Solving Training: using Anderson's 2D Model of educational objectives
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Problem Solving Training: using Anderson's 2D Model of educational objectives

  • 2,586 views
Uploaded on

Designing a problem solving based training in some specialized domain? Using bloom’s taxonomy? Not getting the results? Here is why…..All the way you may be using 1-dimesion of Anderson's revision......

Designing a problem solving based training in some specialized domain? Using bloom’s taxonomy? Not getting the results? Here is why…..All the way you may be using 1-dimesion of Anderson's revision to bloom’s taxonomy or always thinking that pyramid of cognitive processes (misunderstood as learning levels) is all that you need to design your course. This is because most of what educators were given in training consisted of a simple chart with the listing of levels and related accompanying verbs. Biggest misconception is assuming Anderson's revision to bloom's taxonomy as 1-dimensional. Whereas it is indeed 2-dimension. This mostly misunderstood or forgotten 2-dimesion is the key to problem solving. The biggest issue is that 60 year old system has some flaws and either flaws in that system are not properly published or not properly understood. This concise presentation should be able to provide instructional designer and training professional with a tool and right direction to use 2-D Taxonomy by Anderson for design of problem solving training.

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,586
On Slideshare
2,578
From Embeds
8
Number of Embeds
6

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
2
Likes
4

Embeds 8

http://www.linkedin.com 2
https://www.linkedin.com 2
https://m.facebook.com&_=1375318529099 HTTP 1
https://m.facebook.com&_=1375319399412 HTTP 1
https://m.facebook.com&_=1375333391462 HTTP 1
https://m.facebook.com&_=1375361699054 HTTP 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011PROBLEM SOLVING TRAININGDEVELOPING TRAINING OBJECTIVES ANDASSESSMENT USING ANDERSONS 2D MODEL:MOVING AWAY FROM BLOOM’S TAXONOMY TO 5CCTAXONOMYRaman K. Attri© Copyright 20091Copyright(c)2009RamanK.AttriR. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011
  • 2. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011DESIGNING A PROBLEM SOLVING BASED TRAINING IN SOMESPECIALIZED DOMAIN? USING BLOOM’S TAXONOMY? NOTGETTING THE RESULTS? HERE IS WHY…..ALL THE WAY YOU MAY BE USING 1-DIMESION OF ANDERSONS REVISION TO BLOOM’STAXONOMY OR ALWAYS THINKING THAT PYRAMID OF COGNITIVE PROCESSES(MISUNDERSTOOD AS LEARNING LEVELS) IS ALL THAT YOU NEED TO DESIGN YOURCOURSE. THIS IS BECAUSE MOST OF WHAT EDUCATORS WERE GIVEN IN TRAININGCONSISTED OF A SIMPLE CHART WITH THE LISTING OF LEVELS AND RELATEDACCOMPANYING VERBS.BIGGEST MISCONCEPTION IS ASSUMING ANDERSONS REVISION TO BLOOMS TAXONOMYAS 1-DIMENSIONAL. WHEREAS IT IS INDEED 2-DIMENSION. THIS MOSTLYMISUNDERSTOOD OR FORGOTTEN 2-DIMESION IS THE KEY TO PROBLEM SOLVING.THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT 60 YEAR OLD SYSTEM HAS SOME FLAWS AND EITHER FLAWSIN THAT SYSTEM ARE NOT PROPERLY PUBLISHED OR NOT PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.THIS CONCISE PRESENTATION SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNERAND TRAINING PROFESSIONAL WITH A TOOL AND RIGHT DIRECTION TO USE 2-DTAXONOMY BY ANDERSON FOR DESIGN OF PROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING.2 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 3. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011GENERALLY NOT KNOWN ABOUT BLOOM’S TAXONOMYMeets 1956 needs of writing educational objectives in academic settings forschool education but holds no grounds for modern day training issues andcomplex problem solving courseWrongly advocated orunderstood as learning levelsof ‘increased complexity’!!!Rather these are ‘cognitive andlearning processes’ the way mindprocess the information notnecessarily increasing incomplexity.Blooms confuses knowledge with recall. Give knowledgeand then think!!!Rather, Knowledge /= Recall. Blooms ignored the fact thatknowledge is an achievement and comes out of rational use of mentalprocesses and requires critical reflection and thinking to acquire. Notunderstood without use of complex cognition process of application,analysis, synthesis and evaluation - in no particular order.Based on wrongpresupposition of presence ormastery of lower levellearning to achieve higherorder learning!!!Trying to teach facts,principles and concepts inisolation from thinkingskills!!!Rather, a complex interplay of useof application, analysis, andother ‘higher order’ processes areneeded to comprehend theinformation.Intentionally or wrongly assumed no effect of“affective domain” or ‘Attitude” on learning!!Rather attitude, approach, behavior and methodshave profound effect on achieving knowledge andlearning.3 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 4. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011GENERALLY NOT KNOWN ABOUT ANDERSONS MODELMore contemporary needs of 2001 in terms of emphasis on thinking basedcurriculum for higher education but hold no grounds for problem solvingbased complex technical trainingWrongly read as thinkinglevels of ‘increasedcomplexity’ and notion thathigher order thinking comesafter lower order thinking!!!Rather representation is just toshow or explain the difference innomenclature and swapping of twolevels as compared to BloomsStill wrongly considered as learning “levels”or thinking levels!!!Knowledge acquisition, information processing andhigher order thinking is processed by mind throughcomplex interplay of various cognitive processes likeRemembering,, understanding, applying, analyzing,applying evaluating and creatingFacts:No thinking ≠ No KnowledgeUnderstanding ≠ First level of thinkingRemembering + Understanding ≠ Knowledge4 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 5. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011PROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING IS A UNIQUE TRANSFERFUNCTION WHICH TRANSLATES CERTAIN INPUTS (USUALLYPRE-REQUISITE KNOWLEDGE WHETHER OR NOT PROVIDEDRIGHT WITHIN TRAINING) INTO CERTAIN OUTPUT (USUALLYJOB-SPECIFIC SUCCESS FACTORS OR TERMINAL TASKS) BYBUILDING THE “ENABLING” PROBLEM SOLVING AND CRITICALTHINKING COMPETENCIES WITHIN TRAINING.InputProblem Solving TrainingTransfer FunctionOn-the-jobSkills5 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 6. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011TRADITIONAL MODEL OF LEARNING DESIGN & ASSESSMENT ACROSSCOGNITIVE PROCESSES FOR PROBLEM SOLVING TRAININGInput= Remember +UnderstandProblem Solving TrainingTransfer Function= Apply + Analyze+ EvaluateOn-the-jobSkills= CreateKnowledge Application /ProceduralAnalysis Troubleshooting On-the-jobfunctions / skillsPopular misconceivedcategorization oflearning objectivesKnowledge ≠ Remembering+ UnderstandingIssues with alternatecategorizationProcedural ≠ApplicationProblem Solving ≠AnalysisTroubleshooting ≠Evaluation≠ On-The-job readyFacts:• These are different cognitive processes (mechanisms) pre existing in mind through which information isprocessed. (but for what?)• These do NOT represent progressively complex level of learning, understanding or thinking.• Complex recursive interplay of various processes is involved in problem solving in no particular order and withno boundaries between processes.6 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 7. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011SEGREGATION OF EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ASSESSMENTACROSS COGNITIVE PROCESSES DOES NOT GENERATE JOB-SPECIFIC SUCCESS INDICATORS FOR COMPLEX JOB SETTINGSEvery learning inherently and implicitly uses thinking at one or more ofmental cognitive process invisibly in the mind in a complex manner in nodefined order and hence segregation required for instructional design of aproblem solving training is not possible within cognitive processes.7 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 8. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011ACTUAL 2-DIMENSIONAL REPRESENTATION OF ANDERSON’S MODEL FORLEARNING DESIGN AND ASSESSMENTProgressively increase in higher order knowledgefrom factual (or concrete) to abstract knowledgebut for what?Crucial piece for Problem solving based instructional designMeta-cognitive knowledge = Problem Solving + Critical Thinking +Troubleshooting + Meta comprehension + Abstract knowledge +Thinking about thinking8 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 9. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011THE 2-D ANDERSONS MODEL BASICALLY DEPICTS THE INTERSECTIONS AS THE PROCESSESIMPACT THE LEVELS OF KNOWLEDGE. USING A SIMPLE CROSS IMPACT GRID OR TABLE,TRAINERS OR INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNER CAN MATCH EASILY ACTIVITIES AND OBJECTIVES TOTHE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE AND TO THE COGNITIVE PROCESSES AS WELL. IT IS A VERY USEFULTOOL TO USE IN ASSESSING HOW INSTRUCTION IS ACTUALLY IMPACTING LEVELS OF LEARNING.TRAINERS CAN ALSO USE IT TO TRACK WHICH LEVELS OF COGNITION THEY ARE REQUIRINGFROM STUDENTS, AS WELL AS WHICH DIMENSIONS OF KNOWLEDGE.KNOWLEDGE PROGRESSES FROM FACTUAL TO META-COGNITION PRETTY EXPLICITLY. THISEXPLICIT PROGRESSION MAKES IT EASY FOR INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNER TO DESIGN COMPLEXPROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING WITH TANGIBLE AND VISIBLE RESULTS.USE PROGRESSION OF KNOWLEDGE DIMENSIONS IN FORM A 2-D GRID OF KNOWLEDGEDIMENSIONS AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES ALLOW INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNER TO PRODUCEMORE TANGIBLE AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN CONTENTS AND ACTIVITIESWHICH HAS DISTINCT PROGRESSION.KEY TO EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING (WHICH REQUIRES HIGHER ORDERTHINKING AS FUNDAMENTAL SKILL) IS TO DECOUPLE THE SILOS ACROSS COGNITIVEPROCESSES ALONE.9 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. AttriUSING 2-DIMENSIONAL ANDERSONS MODEL FOR TANGIBLE PROBLEM SOLVINGTRAINING
  • 10. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011ANDERSON’S 2D MODEL FOR LEARNING DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OFPROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING√ √ √ √ √ √Knowledge (Input)1. Factual Knowledge2. Conceptual knowledge3. Procedural KnowledgeProblem Solving Training Transferfunction= Meta-cognitive knowledge & thinkingStrategic, reflective , contextual or conditional knowledgeand thinking dimensions how to go about problemsolving.1. Meta-memory2. meta-comprehension (thinking about thinking)3. Problem Solving4. Critical thinking5. Troubleshooting thinking (new!!)Performance orOutput1. On-the-job readiness2. Success indicatorsIgnores that: problem solving assecond nature is deeply controlled by“Attitude” or “Affective domains”(behavior, mindsets, approach,techniques etc10 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 11. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011PROCESSED THROUGH VARIOUS THINKING COGNITIVE PROCESSES,VERTICAL KNOWLEDGE DIMENSION PROVIDESPROGRESSION FROM FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE TO HIGHER ORDER ABSTRACTKNOWLEDGESITUATIONAL AND JUDGMENTAL CAPABILITIES FOR COMPLEX ON-THE-JOBSITUATIONSDECISION MAKING AND CRITICAL EVALUATION CAPABILITYABILITY TO ‘FIGURE OUT’ AND SOLVE THE PROBLEMSABILITY TO EVALUATE ONE’S OWN THINKING AND COMPREHENSION11 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 12. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011META COGNITION DOMAIN IS MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH IN COGNITIVERESEARCH AND HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS KEY TO DESIGN OF PROBLEMSOLVING TRAININGMeta cognition domain represent strategic or reflective knowledge about how to goabout solving problems and how to best use contextual and conditional knowledge forthinking in different situations. it includes knowledge about when and how to useparticular strategies for learning or for problem solving. Metacognition refers tohigher order thinking that involves active control over the thinking processesinvolved in learning.Meta cognition domain promarily split into following in context of problem solvingtraining:-1. Meta-memory and meta-comprehesnsion: Self-interrogation and evaluationto realize one’s own understanding of subject matter.2. Problem Solving3. Critical Thinking4. Troubleshooting thinking12 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. AttriBROADER MEANING OF META-COGNITION IN CONTEXT OF PROBLEM SOLVINGTRAINING
  • 13. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN TANGIBLES IN META-COGNITION FOR DESIGNINGPROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING TRANSFER FUNCTIONProblem SolvingTraining Transferfunction1. Problem Solving abilities2. Critical thinking abilities3. Troubleshooting abilities13 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri1. Problem Solving: Higher level of cognition which involves assessing the overall situation topursue a goal, evaluate possibilities and making a pathway especially when it is uncertain. WHATIS THE SITUATION (WHAT IS WRONG)?2. Critical thinking: A distinct function to problem solving but complementary to problem solving.Both has to co-exist. Involves evaluating and judging situations and ideas. Takes specific formsdepending upon domain or subject area. WHAT COULD HAVE CAUSED THE SITUATION?3. Troubleshooting thinking: A distinct ability to use process of elimination and use a logical andsystematic approach to solve problems quickly and efficiently. to identify the true source of aproblem. WHAT ACTUALLY CAUSED THE SITUATION?
  • 14. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011ANDERSON’S 2D MODEL FOR LEARNING DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OFPROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING√ √ √ √ √ √√ √ √ √ √ √√ √ √ √ √ √√ √ √ √ √ √√ √ √ √ √ √PSCTTS14 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 15. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011NO ONE-TO-ONE MAPPING EXIST BETWEEN KNOWLEDGEDIMENSIONS AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES. COMPLEX INTERPLAY OFCOGNITIVE PROCESSES IS INVOLVED IN PROGRESSIVE KNOWLEDGEACQUISITION.• Factual or Conceptual Knowledge ≠ Remembering+ Understanding• Procedural Knowledge ≠ Application• Problem Solving ≠ Analysis• Critical thinking ≠ Analysis or Evaluation• Troubleshooting ≠ Evaluation15 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 16. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011KNOWLEDGE (K) AND SKILLS (S) ARE NOT SUFFICE INPROVIDING GOOD PROBLEMS SOLVING TRAINING. PROBLEMSOLVING REQUIRES A MINDSET OR ATTITUDE TO SOLVE THEPROBLEMS.THE SUCCESS OF TRANSFER FUNCTION DEPENDS UPON HOWWELL “AFFECTIVE DOMAIN” IS INTEGRATED IN CURRICULUMTO TEACH THINKING SKILLS.AFFECTIVE DOMAIN PERTAINS TO ATTITUDE (A) WHICHINCLUDES MINDSET, APPROACHES, METHODS, TECHNIQUESAND DISPOSITION REQUIRED TO SOLVE A PROBLEMEFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY.16 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. AttriSIGNIFICANCE OF “ATTITUDE” IN DESIGNING AND DELIVERING A PROBLEMSOLVING TRAINING
  • 17. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011KNOWLEDGE + SKILLS = ABILITIES(You “can” do it. You have been equipped to do it, but we are yet to see thedisposition how effectively you do it)17 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 18. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011KNOWLEDGE + SKILLS = ABILITIES(You “can” do it. You have been equipped to do it, but we are yet to see thedisposition how effectively you do it)ABILITIES + ATTITUDE = COMPETENCE(You “can” do it !! You have “right disposition” to do it!! Given rightopportunity you should be able to do it, but you have not proved it yet inreal-life situation)A=Attitude,Behavior,Approach,Methods,Techniques,Mind-set18 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 19. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011KNOWLEDGE + SKILLS = ABILITIES(You “can” do it. You have been equipped to do it, but we are yet to see thedisposition how effectively you do it)ABILITIES + ATTITUDE = COMPETENCE(You “can” do it !! You have “right disposition” to do it!! Given rightopportunity you should be able to do it, but you have not proved it yet inreal-life situation)COMPETENCE + ENVIRONMENT = PERFORMANCE(You are “actually” able to do it!! You have “proved” it in some real-life orcloser to real-life situations!! but you may not have gained the mastery yet)A=Attitude,Behavior,Approach,Methods,Techniques,Mind-setE=ActualJobenvironment,Closer-to-lifeissueorproblem,Real-lifeScenarios19 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 20. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011KNOWLEDGE + SKILLS = ABILITIES(You “can” do it. You have been equipped to do it, but we are yet to see thedisposition how effectively you do it)ABILITIES + ATTITUDE = COMPETENCE(You “can” do it !! You have “right disposition” to do it!! Given rightopportunity you should be able to do it, but you have not proved it yet inreal-life situation)COMPETENCE + ENVIRONMENT = PERFORMANCE(You are “actually” able to do it!! You have “proved” it in some real-life orcloser to real-life situations!! but you may not have gained the mastery yet)PERFORMANCE + REPRODUCIBILITY= PROFICIENCY(You have proved the “mastery” multiple times consistently reproduced inmultiple real-life or closer to real-life situations)A=Attitude,Behavior,Approach,Methods,Techniques,Mind-setE=ActualJobenvironment,Closer-to-lifeissueorproblem,Real-lifeScenariosR= Repeatability, Soundness of skills, Consistency,Reproducibility, Mastery to certain level20 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 21. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 20115 CORE COMPETENCIES (5CC) MODEL OF LEARNING DESIGN AND ASSESSMENTOF PROBLEM SOLVING TRAINING√ √ √ √ √ √Domain Understanding (Input)1. Operations (Factual, Conceptual,Procedural knowledge) and Inter-dependenciesProblem Solving TrainingTransfer function2. Problem Solving Competencies3. Critical thinking Competencies4. Troubleshooting thinkingCompetenciesOn-The-job Readinesscompetencies (Output)5. On-the-job terminal tasks or successindicatorsA=Attitude,Behavior,Approach,Methods,Techniques,Mind-setE=ActualJobenvironment,Closer-to-lifeissueorproblem,Real-lifeScenariosR=Repeatability,Soundnessofskills,Consistency,Reproducibility,Masterytocertainlevel21 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 22. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 20115 CORE COMPETENCIES (5CC) MODEL FOR LEARNING DESIGN ANDASSESSMENT OF OR PROBLEM SOLVING TRAININGDomain Understanding (Input)1. Domain Operations (Factual,Conceptual, Procedural knowledge)and Inter-dependenciesProblem Solving TrainingTransfer function2. Problem Solving Competencies3. Critical thinking Competencies4. Troubleshooting thinkingCompetenciesOn-The-job Readinesscompetencies (Output)5. On-the-job terminal tasks or successindicatorsCORE COMPETENCY 1:• Domain Understanding- What is ideal andnon-ideal behavior of a given object?CORE COMPTENCY 2:• Problem Solving- What is the situation(what is wrong)?CORE COMPENCY 3:• Critical Thinking- What could have causedthe situation?CORE COMPETENCY: 4• Troubleshooting thinking- What actuallycaused the situation?CORE COMPTENCY: 5• On-the-readiness terminal tasks - Whatshould be done to correct , eliminate or preventsituation?22 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 23. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011PROBLEM SOLVING LEARNING DESIGN EQUATIONS• Meta-Cognitive knowledge (and higher-order judgmental knowledge) =Problem Solving + Critical Thinking + Troubleshooting + Meta-Comprehension+ Higher Order Thinking• Knowledge ≠ Recall• Knowledge ≠ Remembering + Understanding• Factual or Conceptual Knowledge ≠ Remembering+ Understanding• Procedural Knowledge ≠ Application• Total understanding = Factual + Conceptual + Procedural Knowledge• Problem Solving ≠ Analysis• Critical thinking ≠ Analysis or Evaluation• Troubleshooting ≠ Evaluation23 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 24. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011LEARNING DESIGN POSTULATIONS• Knowledge is an achievement through critical reflection via complex interplay ofcognitive processes• Design problem Solving training objectives and assessment around vertical axisof Anderson’s Model using free play of cognitive processes24 Copyright (c) 2009 Raman K. Attri
  • 25. R. Attri Training and Learning Management Series, Paper No. 5, June 2011ABOUT THE AUTHORAuthor is Global Learning and Training Consultant specializing in the area ofperformance technology. He has worked extensively in proficiency basedtraining, advanced instructional design, learning design, systems engineeringtechniques and management models. He has professional, research andmanagement experience for over 17 years. He holds MBA in OperationsManagement, Executive MBA, Master degree in Technology and Bachelordegree in Technology with specialization in Electronics and CommunicationEngineering. He has earned numerous international certification awards -Certified Management Consultant (MSI USA/ MRA USA), Certified Six SigmaBlack Belt (ER USA), Certified Quality Director (ACI USA), CertifiedEngineering Manager (SME USA), Certified Project Director (IAPPM USA), toname a few. In addition to this, he has 60+ educational qualifications,credentials and certifications in his name.Raman K. AttriGlobal Learning Consultant and Performance Based Training SpecialistContact: +44 20 7979 1979E-mail: rkattri@rediffmail.comWebsite: http://sites.google.com/site/ramankumarattriLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rkattri/Other Publications: http://www.,slideshare.net/rkattri/Copyright © Raman K. AttriAll rights reserved. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri. No part of this document can be reproduced orused or copied without permission of author.