The document discusses various topics related to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). It begins with an overview of key areas in SoTL research, including research designs, threats to validity, and variables in the study of learning. Different models of teaching are presented, ranging from traditional lecturing to active and collaborative learning techniques. The document then discusses frameworks for conceptualizing teaching and learning, including dimensions of teaching excellence and components that influence learning outcomes. It emphasizes the importance of reflection and assessment in the scholarship of teaching and emphasizes applying evidence-based approaches to improve teaching and maximize student learning.

2. 1. Name
2. Discipline
3. Your
Biggest
classroom
frustration.
4. What do
YOU want
from this
workshop?

3. “The essence of skillful
teaching lies in the teacher
constantly researching
how her students are
experiencing learning and
then making pedagogical
decisions informed by the
insights she gains from the
students’ responses.”
—Stephen D. Brookfield

4.  Contemporary Issues in SoTL
 The Big Picture
 Major Research Designs
 Threats toValidity of SoTL
 KeyVariables in the Study of Learning
 Evidence-BasedTeaching in Higher Education

5. SoTL
Going Through Motions
Sincere Teaching
Scholarly Teaching

6. Gurung & Schwartz (2009) adapted from Richlin (1993)
Systematic, Int
entional
Modifications
KNOWLEDGE BASE
ABOUT
TEACHING/
LEARNING
Assess Success
Publication
Peer Review
Scholarly Teaching
Reflect on
Teaching/Learning
Share results
Presentation

7. Aubrey Stoll: http://500px.com/photo/9827809

8. ..the systematic study of teaching and learning,
using established or validated criteria of
scholarship, to understand how teaching
(beliefs, behaviours, attitudes, and values) can
maximize learning, and/or develop a more
accurate understanding of learning, resulting in
products that are publicly shared for critique
and use by an appropriate community.
 (Potter and Kustra, 2011, p. 2)

9.  Pedagogical research is scholarship too!!!
 Greeks to James …….to …Boyer
 Hutchins & Shulman (1999)

10.  LearningToThink
▪ Donald (2002)
 Decoding disciplines
▪ Identify bottlenecks
▪ Pace & Middendorf, (2004)
 Signature Pedagogies
▪ Teach students your discipline’s habit of mind
▪ Gurung, Chick, & Haynie, (2009); Shulman, (2005)
 Threshold Concepts
▪ Teach students fundamental/troublesome concepts
▪ Land, Meyer & Smith, 2008; Meyer & Land, 2003

11.  Infiltrate the Mainstream
 Run interference
 Look at the Big Picture
 Catalyze SoTL Use

12.  Goal: Make SoTL even more visible.
 Where do you publish your SoTL?
▪ SeeWeimer, 2008
 Where can you publish it?
 Where is your ‘Commons’?
 Break new ground
▪ SoTL tracks
▪ SoTL journals

13.  Goal: Facilitate more SoTL
 Connect with higher administration
 Become higher administration
 Network of department chairs
 Mentoring & Advocacy

14.  Goal: Partition out Influences on Learning
 Models ofTeaching and Learning
▪ What’s on your notepad?
 Empirical data: Meta-meta-analyses

15. Traditional lecture Active learning Service learning Problem-based learning
Group learning Mentoring Cooperative learning Discovery learning
Inductive learning Learning by example Inter-teaching Desirable difficulty
Learner centered Curriculum Centered On-line teaching Clickers
Powerpoint Overheads Chalktalks Teachable moments
Universal design of instruction CAP Model Multiple Intelligences Kolb’s learning styles
Journaling Reflective practice Reciprocal teaching Uncoverage
Concept maps question generation Film strips Laboratory-based instruction
Video clips Role playing Modeling Programmed instruction
Keller method Skill practice Guided practice Collaborative learning
Apprenticeship Situated learning Authentic assessment Formative assessment
Classroom research techniques Book reports Class Discussion Small group discussion
Think-pair-share Peer instruction ConcepTests Panel of experts
Brainstorming Case studies Worksheets Guest speakers
Student debates Jeopardy Portfolios Posters or Bulletin boards
Flashcards Research papers Interviewing Lecture with discussion
Oral reports Study abroad Mock convention Textbook assignments
Just-in-time teaching Jigsaw method Wikis Team teaching
Socratic method Modules Podcasts internships or practicums

16. Traditional lecture Active learning Service learning Problem-based learning
Group learning Mentoring Cooperative learning Discovery learning
Inductive learning Learning by example Inter-teaching Desirable difficulty
Learner centered Curriculum Centered On-line teaching Clickers
Powerpoint Overheads Chalktalks Teachable moments
Universal design of instruction CAP Model Multiple Intelligences Kolb’s learning styles
Journaling Reflective practice Reciprocal teaching Uncoverage
Concept maps question generation Film strips Laboratory-based instruction
Video clips Role playing Modeling Programmed instruction
Keller method Skill practice Guided practice Collaborative learning
Apprenticeship Situated learning Authentic assessment Formative assessment
Classroom research techniques Book reports Class Discussion Small group discussion
Think-pair-share Peer instruction ConcepTests Panel of experts
Brainstorming Case studies Worksheets Guest speakers
Student debates Jeopardy Portfolios Posters or Bulletin boards
Flashcards Research papers Interviewing Lecture with discussion
Oral reports Study abroad Mock convention Textbook assignments
Just-in-time teaching Jigsaw method Wikis Team teaching
Socratic method Modules Podcasts internships or practicums

17. Entwistle (2009)

18. Knowledge
Course
Design
Teacher-Student
Interaction
Course
Management
Beginning of the Course
Fink, L. D. (2003).

19.  Dimension 1: Intellectual Excitement
 Clarity of Presentations (what is presented)
 Emotional Impact on Students (way material is presented)
 Dimension 2: Interpersonal Rapport
 Awareness of Interpersonal Nature of the Classroom
 Communication Skills that Enhance Motivation and
Enjoyment of Learning and that Foster Independent
Learning~
Lowman, J. (1995).

20. StudentTeacher Knowledge LearningTechnique
Social Context
(rapport)
Social Context
(rapport)
Intellectual Excitement
Intellectual Excitement

21. Topic, Content, and
Learning Goals
Level of Student
Understanding
Characteristics of the Teacher
Post-event Reflection
Manipulate
Monitor,
Manage,
Manipulate Monitor Manipulate
Student-Teacher Rapport
and Classroom Atmosphere
In-the-Moment
Reflection Pre-event
Reflection
Form of
Assessment
Teaching
Strategies
Characteristics
of the Learner
Learning
Strategies

22. Background, preparation, and
individual characteristics
Understanding the ways that humans learn
Classroom design, technology,
and institutional priorities
Content difficulty, relevance,
organization, and accuracy
Teaching technique,
teacher behaviors, and
student learning activities
Desired results of teaching,
short- and long-term goals,
and assessment practices
Groccia’s (2012) 7-Component Model
From St. Clair, K. L., & Groccia, J. E. (2012). Change to social justice
education: A higher education strategy. In
Skubikowski, K., Wright, C., & Graf, R. (Eds.). Social justice
education: Inviting faculty to transform their institutions. Sterling, VA:
Stylus.

23.  Making SoTl accessible
 National SoTL infrastructure
▪ (Poole,Taylor, &Thompson, 2007)
 Building on MERLOT
 SoTL Electronic Repository
 The psychology of teaching: An empirically based
guide to picking, choosing, & using pedagogy
 The MetaSearch Project
 Tackle cross-cutting questions.
▪ What are the processes most linked to learning?

24.  Making Learning MoreVisible: Lesson Study
 Blooming BiologyTool
 (Crowe, Dirks, & Wenderoth, 2008)
 Question-Eliciting-Questions
 (Dickman, 2009)

25. HOW do you use SoTL?
Change course design?
Modify assessments?
Tell students about SoTL results?
 Main uses
 (McKinney & Jarvis, 2009; Meyers, 2009)

26. • How will you do it?
• Did it work?
• Present
• Publish
• What’sYOUR question?
• What willYOU do?
• What are students’
learning?
• How can you do better?
• What’s been done?
Reflect
&
Review
Focus &
Change
Assess &
Evaluate
Share &
Respond

27. • How are students’
learning?
• What can you do better?
• What’s been done?
Reflect
&
Review

28. Course
Goal
SLO Assessment
SLO Assessment
Goal
SLO Assessment
SLO Assessment

29. Pedagogy
Content
Text
Readings
Methodology Lecture
Discussion
Assignments
Papers
Service Learning
Oral Presentation
DebateLab

30.  Backward Design (Fink,
2003;Wiggins & McTighe,
1998)
1. Articulate learning goals
first/determine learning
objectives (outcomes)
2. Determine assessment
methods/techniques
3. Select pedagogical /
teaching strategies
 Action Research

32. Landrum, 2012

33. Landrum, 2012

34. Landrum, 2012

35. (Gurung & Landrum, 2012)

36. • What’sYOUR question?
• What willYOU do?
Focus &
Change

37. Someone teaches Something to Someone else
Somewhere (Schwab, 1973)
Teacher
 Scrutinize your assignments
Material
 Textbook evaluations
Students
 How do students study?
Context
 Online, hybrid, face to face

38.  One problem you encounter in your courses
such as:
A student behavior you would like to change
A learning objective you want to better achieve

39.  Flip your classroom
 Engage problem-based learning in a class
 Add a case study approach
 Introduce service-learning components
 Teach without a textbook
 Have students construct learning portfolios
 Increase the amount of writing, music, visuals, or
reflection used in class

40.  One problem you encounter in your courses
 What solution might you use to address the
problem?

41.  LearningToThink
▪ Donald (2002)
 Signature Pedagogies
▪ Teach students your discipline’s habit of mind
▪ Chick, Haynie, & Gurung (2012)
▪ Gurung,Chick, & Haynie (2009)

42.  One problem you encounter in your courses
 What solution, might you try to address one of these
problems?
 How will you assess the success of your solution?
What evidence will you collect?

43.  QuantitativeVs. Qualitative
 Methodology vs. Analysis

44. Research
Design
Describe
Qualitative Quantitative
Correlate Compare
Pre-Post Groups
Across
semesters
Within
semesters
Within
classes

45.  Watch
 Classroom Observation
 Content Analysis
▪ Develop a coding scheme (categories, rubrics)
▪ Units of analysis (words, turns-at-talk)
▪ RaterTraining & Reliability
 Ask
 Survey
 Focus Group
 Protocol Analysis

47.  Retention over the term
 Journal evidence
 Student discussion increases
 Student preparation improves
 Student evaluations improve
 Portfolio showcasing student work
 Classroom assessment techniques

48. Quantitative
 survey scores
 course exam, project,
paper scores
 frequencies of multiple
choice test item
responses
 standardized scales and
tests
 counts (participation,
web requests, office
visits)
 measures of time use
 institutional research
data
Qualitative
 performances
 interviews
 focus groups
 student projects
 term papers
 essay items
 exams
 reflective statements
 journals
 reports of others

50. • How will you do it?
• Did it work?
Assess &
Evaluate

51.  Statistical Significance (SPSS;EXCEL)
 Correlational r (ranges from -1 to 1)
 T-Tests; Analysis ofVariance (ANOVA)

53. 1
.9
2
.7
3
.5
2
3
.1
2
.2
2
.9
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4Out.
Summ.
Bold
Italics
Key
Review
(Gurung, 2003; 2004)

54. -0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
O
utlines
B
oldface
R
eview
K
eyT
(Gurung, 2004)

55. 0.18
0.15
0.19
Online
Correlations to Exam Score
Connect MyPsychLab Psychportal

56. Comparing Group Differences?
65
70
75
80
Guess/Open Read First
Exam Scores

57. CompareClasses
Ethical counterbalance
CompareClasses
Intervention
RandomAssignment
Class
Section
1
Novelty
Test
Nothing
Test
Section
2
Nothing
Test
Novelty
Test

58. CompareGroups
Ethical counterbalance
CompareGroups
Intervention
RandomAssignment
Class
Group1
Novelty
Test
Nothing
Test
Group 2
Nothing
Test
Novelty
Test

63.  Choosing question formats
 Writing well-worded questions
 Encouraging accurate responses

64. Open-ended questions
Forced-choice format
Likert scale
Semantic differential format

65. Leading questions
Double-barreled questions
Double negatives (vs. negatively worded items)
Question order

66. Response sets (three types)
 Yea-saying/ nay-saying
 Fence sitting
Faking good or bad
Saying more than we can know
Measuring subjectivity vs. objectivity

68.  Your Name:
 What do you look like?
 Yesterday we talked about validity. Did I do a good job of explaining it?
a. Absolutely! b. Completely c.Very much yes d. yes e. Mostly yes
 Is this your favorite workshop and do you have two legs? Yes/No
 Do you favor reducing the overwhelming amount of homework you are forced
against your will to do? Yes/No
 If you weren’t to advocate not doing your homework, would you also not
advocate not increasing the amount of reading you don’t feel is too much
already? A. No B. Not no
 Do you enjoy being alive? Yes/No
 DO you think humans should keep having children?Yes/No
 Will you give me a chilly pepper on ratemyprofessors.com?Yes/No
anonymity
Scale
choice
Double
barrel
Loaded
Double Negative
Yea saying
response
set

69. Fence sitting
possible
No labels on all
items
Too Many
choices

70. Design confound
Selection effect
Order effect
Maturation
History
Regression to the mean
Attrition
Testing
Instrumentation
Observer bias
Demand characteristics
Placebo effects

71. Individual results may vary.

72.  To Publish or Present---
 Get Institutional Review
Board (IRB) clearance
▪ Gurung (2012)

73. • Present
• Publish
Share &
Respond

76. John Hattie (2009)
 800+ meta-analysis
 50,000 studies
 240+ million students
 Elementary, secondary, & tertiary

77. Percentage of Learning Variance
Students
Lecturers
Home
Peers
TEOs Others

78. Decreased EnhancedZero
0 .22
Typical
Effect Size
1.0
.40

79. Rank Influence Studies Effects ES
1 Self-reported grades/SC of ability 209 305 1.44
2 Piagetian programs 51 65 1.28
3 Formative evaluation of own teaching 30 78 .90
4 Micro teaching 402 439 .88
5 Acceleration 37 24 .88
6 Classroom behavioral 160 942 .80
7
Comprehensive interventions for
learning disabled students 343 2654 .77
8 Teacher clarity na na .75
9 Reciprocal teaching 38 53 .74
10 Feedback 1287 2050 .73

80. Strategy #13 Example ES
Organizing &
transforming Making an outline before writing a paper .85
Self-consequences Putting off pleasurable events until work is completed .70
Self-instruction Self-verbalizing the steps to complete a given task .62
Self-evaluation Checking work before handing in to teacher .62
Help-seeking Using a study partner .60
Keeping records Recording of information related to study tasks .59
Rehearsing and
memorizing Writing a mathematics formula down until it is remembered .57
Goal-setting/planning Making lists to accomplish during studying .49
Reviewing records Reviewing class textbook before going to lecture .49
Self-monitoring
Observing and tracking one’s own performance and
outcomes .45
Task strategies Creating mnemonics to remember facts .45
Imagery Creating or recalling vivid mental images to assist learning .44
Time management Scheduling daily studying and homework time .44
Environmental
restructuring
Efforts to select or arrange the physical setting to make
learning easier .22

81. Individual results may vary.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
ACT/SAT
Highsch
SES
Skills
Self-efficacy
Commitment
Goals
Motivation
Robbins, Lauver, Le, Davis, Langley, & Carlstrom (2004)

82.  Cognitive:ACT, SAT, Highschool GPA
 Non-Cognitive:
 Conscientiousness (Noftle & Robins, 2007)
 Intrinsic Motivation (Komarraju, Karau, &
Schmeck, 2009)
 Self-Efficacy
 Academic discipline

83. Learning
Instruction
Effort
X

85. Mental
learning
models
Learning
orientations
Context
Richardson, 20
11

86. 86
Psychological Science in the
Public Interest
14(1) 4–58
© TheAuthor(s) 2013
Reprintsand permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI:10.1177/1529100612453266
http://pspi.sagepub.com
Improving Students’ Learning W ith
Effective Learning Techniques: Promising
DirectionsFrom Cognitive and
Educational Psychology
John Dunlosky1
, Katherine A. Rawson1
, Elizabeth J. Marsh2
,
Mitchell J. Nathan3
, and Daniel T. W illingham4
1
Department of Psychology, Kent State University; 2
Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University;
3
Department of Educational Psychology, Department of Curriculum & Instruction, and Department of Psychology,
University of Wisconsin–Madison; and 4
Department of Psychology, University of Virginia
Summary
Many students are being left behind by an educational system that some people believe is in crisis. Improving educational
outcomes will require efforts on many fronts, but a central premise of this monograph is that one part of a solution involves
helping students to better regulate their learning through the use of effective learning techniques. Fortunately, cognitive and
educational psychologists have been developingand evaluatingeasy-to-use learningtechniques that could help students achieve
their learning goals. In this monograph, we discuss 10 learning techniques in detail and offer recommendations about their

87. Dunloskyet
Table 1. LearningTechniques
Technique Description
1.Elaborative interrogation Generatingan explanation for why an explicitly stated fact or concept is true
2.Self-explanation Explaininghow new information is related to known information, or explainingsteps taken
duringproblem solving
3.Summarization Writingsummaries (of various lengths) of to-be-learned texts
4.Highlighting/underlining Markingpotentially important portions of to-be-learned materials while r eading
5.Keyword mnemonic Usingkeywords and mental imager y to associate verbal materials
6.Imagery for text Attemptingto form mental images of text materials while r eadingor listening
7.Rereading Restudyingtext material again after an initial r eading
8.Practice testing Self-testingor takingpractice tests o ver to-be-learned material
9.Distributed practice Implementingaschedule of practice that spr eads out study activities over time
10.Interleaved practice Implementingaschedule of practice that mix es different kinds of problems,or aschedule of
study that mixes different kinds of material, within asingle study session
Note.See text for adetailed description of each learningtechnique and r elevant examples of their use.
Table 2. Examples of the Four Categories ofVariables for Generalizability
Materials Learningconditions Student characteristicsa
Criterion tasks
87

88. 88
Improving Student Achievement 45
in Table 4 with an I rating highlights the need for further sys-
tematic research.
Finally, some cells include more than one rating. In these
cases, enough evidence exists to evaluate a technique on one
dimension of a category or issue, yet insufficient evidence is
review to make informed decisions about which techniques
will best meet their instructional and learning goals.
Implicationsfor research on learning
Table 4. UtilityAssessment and Ratings of Generalizability for Each of the LearningTechniques
Technique Utility Learners Materials
Criterion
tasks
Issues for
implementation
Educational
contexts
Elaborative interrogation Moderate P-I P I P I
Self-explanation Moderate P-I P P-I Q I
Summarization Low Q P-I Q Q I
Highlighting Low Q Q N P N
The keyword mnemonic Low Q Q Q-I Q Q-I
Imagery use for text learning Low Q Q Q-I P I
Rereading Low I P Q-I P I
Practice testing High P-I P P P P
Distributed practice High P-I P P-I P P-I
Interleaved practice Moderate I Q P-I P P-I
Note:A positive (P) ratingindicates that available evidence demonstrates efficacy of alearningtechnique with r espect to agiven variable or issue.A
negative (N) ratingindicates that atechnique is largel y ineffective for agiven variable.A qualified (Q) ratingindicates that the technique yielded positiv e
effects under some conditions (or in some gr oups) but not others.An insufficient (I) ratingindicates that ther e is insufficient evidence to suppor t a
definitive assessment for one or more factors for agiven variable or issue.
Dunlowsky et al. (2013)

90. “The growth of any craft depends on
shared practice and honest dialogue
among the people who do it. We grow
by private trial and error, to be sure –
but our willingness to try, and fail, as
individuals is severely limited when we
are not supported by a community that
encourages such risks.”
—Parker J. Palmer

91. Helen Regueiro Elam explains in “The Difficulty of
Reading” (1991: 73),
 American culture does not take well to the idea of
difficulty.Our penchant is for one-step, one-stop
solutions to problems, and we expect and demand
in all areas of life, including reading, an ease of
achievement that is antithetical to thought itself. . .
. Difficulty is there to be overcome, disposed of,
certainly not to become the invisible partner of our
daily lives.

92. Chick, Hassel, & Haynie (2009)