Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•3,733 views
Keynote at University of Birmingham annual teaching and learning conference, June 2013.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart
Similar to Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart (20)
More from Simon Bates
More from Simon Bates (18)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart
- 1. 7 Research-Based Principles For Learning & Teaching Adapted from ‘How Learning Works’
- 2. Overview I. The space of technology-enhanced II.Case study: PHYS101 at UBC
- 4. Learning content Digital, open and at-scale - 1 in 8 courses available as a MOOC, somewhere - 370 courses, 70 institutions on Coursera - 4 million students on MOOC platforms last year (Coursera, edX, Udacity) Source: Coursera, edX, Udacity websites
- 5. Students Source: ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology,2012. http://educause.edu/ecar-student-2012
- 6. Evidence From FL site Source: Educause meta analysis and review of online learning studies http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/evaluation-evidence-based-practices-online-learning-meta-analysis-and-review-online-learning-studies
- 7. Evidence Meta-analysis of >1000 studies (1996-2008) Included studies that - contrasted online to f-2-f - measured learning outcomes - rigorous research design - calculated effect size On average, students performed better in online learning situations Difference in outcomes largest in blended situations, but not the media per se. Source: Educause meta analysis and review of online learning studies http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/evaluation-evidence-based-practices-online-learning-meta-analysis-and-review-online-learning-studies
- 8. Evidence From FL site Source: Changing Course, Sloan Consortium 2012 http://www.pearsonlearningsolutions.com/assets/downloads/reports/changing-course-survey.pdf
- 9. Acceptance Source: Changing Course, Sloan Consortium 2012 http://www.pearsonlearningsolutions.com/assets/downloads/reports/changing-course-survey.pdf
- 10. Uptake From FL site Source: Changing Course, Sloan Consortium 2012 http://www.pearsonlearningsolutions.com/assets/downloads/reports/changing-course-survey.pdf Educause meta analysis and review of online learning studies http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/evaluation-evidence-based-practices-online-learning-meta-analysis-and-review-online-learning-studies
- 11. But…. Source: ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology,2012. http://educause.edu/ecar-student-2012
- 13. A case study PeerWise in PHAS 101
- 15. • Web-based Multiple Choice Question repository built by students • Students: – develop new questions with associated explanations – answer existing questions and rate them for quality and difficulty – take part in discussions – can follow other authors peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz
- 17. 18 As a question author…..
- 18. 19
- 19. 20
- 22. 23 As a question answerer …..
- 23. 24
- 24. 25
- 25. 26
- 26. 27
- 27. Timeline 2010-11: UoE pilot study 2011-12: Multi-institution, multi-course 2012-13: UBC PHYS 101 Coursera MOOC 28
- 28. Previous research • Good engagement and participation beyond the minimum requirements • Correlation between use and end-of-course outcome • Replication study in 3 institutions, 5 courses, 3 disciplines 1st year Physics N=172 University of Edinburgh
- 29. 1st year Physics N=172 University of Edinburgh 1st year Chemistry N=172 University of Edinburgh
- 30. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 1 2 3 4 5 6 Taxonomic Category PercentageofSubmittedQuestions Previous research • Question quality: mapped onto levels in cognitive domain of Bloom’s taxonomy • Surprisingly high overall quality, even from ‘novices’ First semester N = 350 Second semester N = 252
- 31. Implementation in PHAS 101 8 sections (4-3-1) N(total)~1800 2012 W2 3 sections N=791 All non majors. 2 PeerWise assignments - scaffolded ahead of the first - support woven into 4 subsequent tutorials 33
- 32. Assessment requirements As a minimum: • Write one question • Answer 5 • Comment on & rate 3 Contributed ~2.5% to course assessment (mostly participation, small bonus for performance) Student questions on midterm and final exams. 34
- 33. We were deliberately hands off. • No moderation • No corrections • No interventions at all But we did observe….. 35
- 37. Engagement First assessment exercise: • 664 active students (out of 790!) • 1340 Q, 11000 A, 5000 C • x1.75, x17, x7 minimum requirements
- 39. Engagement Score
- 40. Examples 42
- 41. 43
- 48. Take homes • There exist a huge variety of ways you can harness technology to support student learning. • Horse-before-cart
- 49. Acknowledgements Physics 101 course team Georg Rieger Firas Moosvi Emily Altiere UBC CWSEI simon.bates@ubc.ca @simonpbates These slides: http://bit.ly/Bates_Bham2013 Ross Galloway Judy Hardy Karon McBride Alison Kay Keith Brunton Jonathan Riise Danny Homer Chemistry – Peter Kirsop Biology – Heather McQueen Physics – Morag Casey Comp Sci – Paul Denny
- 50. Resources - PeerWise Site: http://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz Community: http://www.PeerWise-Community.org JISC-funded multi institution study:https://www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/SGC4L/Home UoE Physics Pilot Study: AIP Conf. Proc. 1413, 359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3680069 RSC overview article http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2013January/studen t-generated-assessment.asp UoE Physics scaffolding resources http://www2.ph.ed.ac.uk/elearning/projects/peerwise/
- 52. Question quality analysis (1st year Physics University of Edinburgh) Assessing the quality of a student-generated question repository, submitted to Phys Rev, ST Phys Educ Res. Multi-institution, multi-course study Student-generated content: Enhancing learning through sharing multiple-choice questions, submitted to International Journal of Science Education Scaffolding Student Learning via Online Peer Learning, submitted to International Journal of Science Education Publications in preparation / review / press
Editor's Notes
- Content gone digital, open and essentially free. Or very low cost.
- Can follow the author
- Scaffolding provided in terms of how to come up with material for good questions. The above handout (a blank version was also provided) encourages students to choose topics within their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), identify misconceptions or things they don’t understand and devise questions with a realistic context. Students got around 45 mins for this activity
- Ross – placeholder for now, to be updated with accurate graphs after 14th Dec exam
- A Pearson product-moment correlation was performed which showed that there was a statistically significant positive relationship between the CM score and the end-of-module examination mark (E) in all modules, with a small to moderate correlation rCME, see Table 5. First-order partial correlation was then conducted to explore this relationship, controlling for the pre-module test mark (P). The partial correlation rCME.P was found to be statistically significant, with values between 0.18 and 0.40 (see Table 5). This indicates that there was a positive relationship between the CM score and the end-of-module mark even when taking into account student ability, as measured by their pre-module test mark.
- Scaffolding provided in terms of how to come up with material for good questions. The above handout (a blank version was also provided) encourages students to choose topics within their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), identify misconceptions or things they don’t understand and devise questions with a realistic context. Students got around 45 mins for this activity
- We provided screencasts online to cover details of signing up, logging in, creating questions, finding questions to answer These are now hosted on the PW site.Creating most popular, viewed 170 times (not necessarily all from the 1A course) Assessment set due 9 days later
- We provided screencasts online to cover details of signing up, logging in, creating questions, finding questions to answer These are now hosted on the PW site.Creating most popular, viewed 170 times (not necessarily all from the 1A course) Assessment set due 9 days later
- Scaffolding provided in terms of how to come up with material for good questions. The above handout (a blank version was also provided) encourages students to choose topics within their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), identify misconceptions or things they don’t understand and devise questions with a realistic context. Students got around 45 mins for this activity
- Scaffolding provided in terms of how to come up with material for good questions. The above handout (a blank version was also provided) encourages students to choose topics within their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), identify misconceptions or things they don’t understand and devise questions with a realistic context. Students got around 45 mins for this activity
- Aside from this being a very creative question, with a great diagram, and a good spread of answers it is also a nice example of peer-tutoringThe author wrote the question and got the calculation wrong in the first version of the questionThis was picked up on, and corrected by, another student the same evening, and the version of the question replaced with the peer’s correct explanation We also placed one of the student generated questions on the exam (not this one).
- This is typical of questions submitted by the highest performing students Focussed on quantitative problemsolving* Amusing context * Great care and attention with diags and maths The 4 images show question solutions sketch Solution maths Comment and author’s response.