Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
A+ Assessment Plus ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP 5 APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR OWN WORK WORKSHOPS ON UNDERSTANDING ESSAY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS IN THE SCIENCES, SOCIAL SCIENCES, AND RELATED DISCIPLINES Assessment Plus (A+) is a two-year consortium project to develop tailored resources for students and staff that focus on core aspects of assessment criteria. The work is taking place at London Metropolitan University, Liverpool Hope University College, and Aston University, radiating out to a number of external partner institutions. For further details, see the project web site at http://www.assessmentplus.net . A+ Assessment Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Contents (Version April 2004) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 Overview of the workshop programme 5 Note to tutors on using the protocols 6 Support materials 6 Comments welcome 6 Attracting students 7 WORKSHOP FIVE: APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR OWN WORK 9 Activity 22 – Using the Essay Feedback Checklist 9 Activity 23 – Making action plans from feedback 10 Resources for workshop five 13 The Essay Feedback Checklist 15 Overview of sample essays and marks 17 Sample essay: 1 19 Sample essay: 2 27 Sample essay: 3 31 EVALUATION OF THE WORKSHOP PROGRAMME 37 Overview of evaluation forms 37 Student evaluation form for Workshop 5 A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 3 39 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Contents (Version April 2004) Student evaluation form for the workshop programme 41 Staff evaluation form for the workshop programme 45 51 REFERENCES A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 4 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction (Version April 2004) INTRODUCTION Overview of the workshop programme One of the aims of the Assessment Plus (A+) project is to support student learning by highlighting the role of assessment criteria. This project is intended to enhance students’ academic writing skills and improve their essay writing performance. In doing this we hope to address national agendas of widening participation and retention as well as provide practical help to new entrants to Higher Education. Most students entering Higher Education have only a limited understanding of what is meant by the term ‘assessment criteria’ and do not automatically target their work towards meeting the criteria in a way that is acceptable to the demands of their chosen subject. It is hoped that the proposed series of workshops will: provide students with a clearer understanding of what assessment criteria are and how they are used eradicate any misconceptions students have about what is considered appropriate writing in Higher Education demystify the essay-writing process improve students’ academic writing. All of the material in this document is freely available for colleagues to use or adapt, provided acknowledgment is made to Assessment Plus by citing the project web site. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 5 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction (Version April 2004) Note to tutors on using the protocols The intention of this document is to provide you with some suggestions for workshop activities to help your students write better essays. As such it can be used to deliver the workshop as outlined, either on its own or as part of the series of five workshops, or it can be regarded as a resource from which to pick and choose specific activities for integration into existing tutorials or programmes. The workshop series Each workshop follows the standard format of a brief rationale followed by a number of suggested activities. Workshop 1 is a general introduction to assessment criteria and why they are important. Workshops 2, 3 and 4 each cover two assessment criteria, though separate workshops could be dedicated to each of the criteria if preferred. Finally, workshop 5 gets students to put it all together and apply what they have learned to their next essay or to look at a past essay and see how it could be improved. Support materials Most of the materials you will need to run the activities in the workshops are provided with these downloadable documents. Following each workshop protocol, there is a resources section containing relevant handouts. Occasionally, you will need to supply some of the materials needed (such as journals and books for students to evaluate in Workshop 4); when this is the case, it is clearly indicated in the protocols. In addition, you may find that you would like to substitute some of your own materials for the ones provided here. In this case, the protocols and resources can act as a guide or template. Comments welcome Part of the process of developing any support for students involves trialling and evaluating, and the Assessment Plus team welcomes informal feedback and comments at any stage. Please contact Katherine Harrington at [email protected] . In addition, the project has developed evaluation forms for each workshop and for the series as a whole for both students and staff. Please see the section on Evaluation of the Workshop Programme towards the end of this document for copies of the forms. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 6 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction (Version April 2004) Attracting students Tutors may offer these workshops as optional or compulsory depending on the local context and the perceived necessity for such support. For those who are hoping to encourage students on an optional basis, it is important to avoid any ‘remedial’ overtones. The following workshop titles are suggested as more student-friendly and more attractive than the more soberly phrased titles in this protocol. Of course, deciding which titles to use is a matter for individual tutors who know their own students best and what is most likely to appeal to them. Protocol titles Student friendly titles Programme Workshops on understanding assessment criteria for 1st year students ‘Writing at university’ Workshop 1 What are assessment criteria? ‘The key to improving your grades’ Workshop 2 Addressing the question Structuring the answer ‘Where to begin…?’ Workshop 3 Demonstrating understanding Developing argument ‘How to show you know what you're writing about’ Workshop 4 Use of evidence Evaluation ‘Looking for the evidence’ Workshop 5 Applying the criteria to your own work ‘Becoming more expert in your essay writing’ A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 7 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 8 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) WORKSHOP FIVE: APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR OWN WORK Purpose and rationale It is important that students feel these workshops have had a point. The easiest way to do this is by showing how the subjects discussed can be applied to their own work. Although we have attempted to make the criteria meaningful by including a lot of practical activities, the real test will come when students attempt to look at their own work in relation to the criteria. This workshop is meant to tie up what has been learned from the programme by getting students to bring their own work to the session. Alternatively, you could conduct the activities below using one or more of the sample essays included with this pack. Structure This workshop proposes a choice of two activities. Activity 22 – Using the Essay Feedback Checklist Students could bring along copies of draft essays and work together in pairs to identify strengths and weaknesses of their own and each other’s work. Handout Alternatively, select one or more of the sample essays included in the resources section. (The sample essays included here are on introductory topics in the area of psychology. However, tutors may prefer to provide their own essays that cover different topics. Suggestions of sample essays to include in future versions of the protocols would be gratefully received by the A+ team.) Handout Provide students with a copy of the Essay Feedback Checklist (Norton, Clifford, Hopkins, Toner and Norton, 2002; Norton and Norton, 2001) to support them in this task. In general, findings from these studies have suggested that there are relatively few discrepancies between students’ and tutors’ ratings, but that there is a slight tendency for students to over-rate themselves. The EFC is a simple tool to enable students to focus on the assessment criteria while they are actually writing an essay. It then functions as a method of targeting feedback in areas A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 9 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) where students need it most – i.e., where there is a discrepancy between their own rating and that of the person marking their essay. Ask students to complete an EFC for their own essays, before swapping EFCs and essays with a partner. Students should then mark and give feedback on their partner’s essay using the EFC. The value of this activity is in getting fellow students to highlight for each other the criteria which are well demonstrated and those which need working on – a very basic type of peer assessment. It is hoped that the students themselves will identify the areas in their essays that need work, but you can be on hand deal with questions and disputes as they arise. A satisfactory conclusion might be to ask student pairs to highlight the ‘troublesome’ criteria which could then be used as the focus for tutor reassurance that essay writing is a skill that improves with practice … . Activity 23 – Making action plans from feedback This activity was designed by Laurence Hopkins and Rebecca Clifford of Liverpool Hope University College. Students could bring along essays they have already produced and had returned to them with marks and feedback from their tutors. They could then work through areas that have been highlighted as needing attention as well as see if they can further improve those areas where they have been successful in meeting the criteria. One way of helping students with this is to ask them to produce an action plan for what they intend to change in writing their second essay. As can be seen, first-year psychology students appear to have valued this activity: ‘From talking about the essays in a group, it has made me realise that most of the group have had common problems … .’ ‘From discussing feedback in a group I have been able to see from others’ feedback how a different approach is needed. Also how some mistakes such as a lack of evaluation are common, therefore I need to read with a critical eye.’ ‘From this detailed feedback I have learnt that other people made the same mistakes as me so I knew I wasn’t the only one … .’ ‘Talking about the essay in a group has helped me think about the changes I need to make to my own essay. It has helped me think about typical errors which are made in essay writing (e.g. lack of evaluation) … .’ (Norton et al., 2002, p.121) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 10 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) Conclusion By the end of this workshop students should have a much clearer idea of some practical steps they can take to improve their next essay. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 11 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 12 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) RESOURCES FOR WORKSHOP FIVE: APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR OWN WORK A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 13 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 14 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) The Essay Feedback Checklist The following Essay Feedback Checklist is an adaptation of that developed by Norton, Clifford, Hopkins, Toner and Norton (2002) and Norton and Norton (2001). Please give a rating of how confident you feel about having met each of the assessment criteria: C = Confident – I think I have met this criterion to the best of my ability. P = Partially confident – I have tried to meet this criterion but would appreciate more feedback. N = Not at all confident – I do not understand this criterion and need more guidance. C Addressed the question throughout the essay? student feedback Organised the essay clearly with a structure that supports a considered conclusion? student feedback Demonstrated understanding of the research, concepts, and/or theories? student feedback A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 15 P N A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) C = Confident – I think I have met this criterion to the best of my ability. P = Partially confident – I have tried to meet this criterion but would appreciate more feedback. N = Not at all confident – I do not understand this criterion and need more guidance. C P N Put forward a reasoned argument which shows evaluation and analysis? student feedback Use of evidence to support essay answer? student feedback Evaluated research evidence and theoretical concepts? tutor feedback Norton, L., Clifford, R., Hopkins, L., Toner, I., & Norton, J.C.W. (2002). Helping psychology students write better essays. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 2, 116-126. Norton, L.S. & Norton, J.C.W. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students improve their academic writing? Paper and workshop given at the first international conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing across Europe (EATAW), Groningen, 18-20 June 2001. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 16 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Overview of sample essays and marks Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence from both fields. Essay 1: 74% Essay 2: 58% Essay 3: 43% A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 17 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 18 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Sample essay: 1 Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence from both fields. Learning is a vital part of being human. Through learning we can acquire new skills, facts and fit into society successfully through knowledge of their norms of behaviour and so on. The majority of a humans’ life is devoted to learning, much of which is never even put into action. Due to evolution, humans are also born with a certain amount of innate behaviour, for example, babies possess a sucking reflex which is stimulated when placed near its mother’s nipple. However, all behaviour cannot be innate as our environment is constantly changing due to advances in technology and so on, consequently, much of our behaviour must be acquired after birth. Psychologists use the term ‘plastic’ to refer to learnt behaviour and declare that the more variable the environment the more plastic the behaviour. (Anderson, p.1-2) The behaviourist approach in psychology originated in America at the beginning of the twentieth century. Learning was central to the behaviourist approach, which believed “ most human and animal behaviour could be understood as the result of basic learning mechanisms operating on the experiences provided by the environment.” (Anderson, 1995) Behaviourists aimed to develop theories without referring to processes going on in an organisms mind, insisting that psychology should have a firm empirical basis. It was their claim of being the first truly scientific psychology that contributed largely to the popularity of behaviourism. Until behaviourism began, psychology had consisted largely of philosophic speculation, rather than science. Behaviourists argued that by concentrating only on visible behaviour, all the virtually impossible questions about the mind that philosophers and psychologists had laboured over for thousands of years could be avoided. Behaviourism, therefore, appealed to people because it was practical and focussed on commonsense knowledge rather than trying to obtain ultimate solutions. (Anderson, p.3 and Hunt, p.262-3) Non-human animals tended to be used in behaviourist research as when behaviourism began at the turn of the century, Darwin’s theory of evolution was still influencing societies beliefs and as he argued that we were continuous A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 19 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) with other animals it was thought that the laws of learning that held for animals would also hold for humans. Also behaviourists felt that research on learning using human participants may be affected by language and culture. (Anderson, p.3) The cognitive approach to learning came about in the middle of the twentieth century and was inspired by the feeling that the behaviourist view of human cognition was too basic. In contrast, cognitivism was the view that complex mental processes played a vital role in shaping human behaviour and much of cognitive research involved studying these mental processes. Cognitive psychologists studied learning using human participants but called them memory experiments, defining memory as the “relatively permanent record of the experience that underlies learning.” (Anderson, 1995) The term ‘record’ suggests that the creation of a memory record is a mental change that expresses the learning. (Anderson, p.3-4) Learning as a topic in psychology can be traced back to two main sources. The first is Ebbinghaus’ book On Memory, published in 1883. The German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus was one of the main pioneers of memory research, using himself as his sole subject. Ebbinghaus is often referred to as the “father of verbal learning” for various reasons; he developed experimental methodologies suitable for studying learning and forgetting in humans and which are still used today; he produced the retention curve and the learning curve; his use of nonsense syllables was applied in verbal learning research for generations to come; he created interest in serial learning and he gave verbal learning it’s theoretical basis in associationism. Ebbinghaus, therefore, made methodological and empirical contributions that influenced later research on human memory, a tradition that grew to be more renowned than the behaviourally orientated research on learning in animals. (Kintsch, p.63 and Anderson, p.8) The second major influence on later research in learning is Pavlov’s work on classical conditioning. (Pavlov, 1927; 1928) This process involved associations being made, for instance, food is an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) that elicits the unconditioned response (UCR) in animals, which is salivation. However, Pavlov discovered that if the UCS is continually paired with a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS), such as a bell, the CS eventually acquires the ability to evoke the response by itself. Pavlov found that with every A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 20 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) pairing of the UCS and CS the association was reinforced, however, if repeatedly presented alone, the CS loses its ability to produce the CR. Pavlov termed this process extinction. (Kintsch, p.63) An indication of how, in recent years, the two approaches have begun to merge together more is how the original learning of the associations has been viewed as analogous to acquisition (Haberlandt, p.37) and the extinction function for conditioning has also been compared to the retention or forgetting function for memory, the only methodological difference being the forgetting function can be obtained by waiting, whereas extinction requires presentation of the CS without the UCS. The association between the CS and CR can also suddenly reappear some time after extinction and this spontaneous recovery also differs from forgetting. (Anderson, p11-12) Classical conditioning appealed to behaviourists as they saw it as uncomplicated by the idea of mental processes. However, more recent research on classical conditioning has viewed the learning as more cognitively involved, which is undoubtedly true in some cases, such as with humans. (Anderson, p.75) Researchers have also traced the neural basis of certain instances of classical conditioning in certain organisms. However, classical conditioning also occurs in animals, such as the Aplysia, (sea slug) that do not have central nervous systems, let alone a mammalian brain, hence it seems unlikely that all classical conditioning requires cognitive involvement. (Anderson, p.75) Thorndike (1898) discovered a second kind of conditioning and called this phenomena instruemental conditioning. In this kind of associative learning, there is no unconditioned stimulus that can be presented to elicit the desired response; instead the experimenter must wait for the organism to carry out the response, usually after a period of trial and error. Once this occurred the experimenter could reinforce this response by giving the organism a reinforcing stimulus i.e. a reward such as food or escape. Thorndike found that through reinforcement he could increase the likelihood of the desired response being repeated. The model that tends to be used is that of a hungry rat in a puzzle box, learning to press a bar in order to get a food pellet, which was the reinforcement. Thorndike suggested that the desired response was gradually strengthened to the stimulus situation of being in the puzzle box, so that its occurrence became more likely A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 21 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) than other more random responses. He believed that this strengthening process did not require any cognitive activity and was instead automatic. (Kintsch, p.63-64) Thorndike’s and Pavlov’s work led to the belief that all behaviour can be explained in terms of stimulus-response bonds (Anderson, p.15-16) However, Skinner, who was a neobehaviourist, meaning his approach was a more complex version of behaviourism, dismissed the idea of stimulus-response associations due to what he referred to as free operants. These were responses that animals produced in situations without any observable stimuli manipulation. Skinner made major contributions to the study of instruemental conditioning, or, as he preferred to call it, operant conditioning. A large amount of his research involved his work on schedules of reinforcement, which was his examination into how different relationships between reinforcement and response affected the frequency with which the response was emitted. For example, he found that if partial reinforcement was given, the learned behaviour was more resistant to extinction than if they were trained to expect regular reinforcement as they realised quicker that reinforcement has ceased. Skinner’s focus was on understanding how behaviour is controlled and how it could be changed rather than an explanation of what was happening inside an organism. One important concept he developed was that of response shaping which was the idea that existing behaviour could be gradually shaped into a desired form. For example, a rat could be trained to press a lever harder by selectively reinforcing harder presses. Skinner also introduced the idea of response chaining which is the view that complex behaviours are a made up of simple responses, each setting the context of the next. A complex behaviour could therefore be learnt by teaching each element of the chain until the whole response was complete. Response shaping and response chaining have been used to teach animals amazing things. For example, a pig was trained to make breakfast, pick up dirty clothes and vacuum. (Breland & Breland, 1951) Due to demonstrations such as this, Skinner concluded that all complex behaviour, including human behaviour, was the result of response shaping and training produced by appropriate schedules of reinforcement. (Anderson, p.20-24) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 22 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Although Skinner’s principles have been successful when applied to areas such as education and psychotherapy, where the goal is to shape behaviour, it has also been criticised for overlooking essential aspects of human personality and emotion and trying to turn humans into robots. Skinner’s approach also had a major scientific problem as it failed to extend to complex human cognition and this deficiency became blatantly obvious when Skinner tried to analyse language acquisition in his book, Verbal Behaviour (1957). Unfortunately for Skinner, the linguist Noam Chomsky (1959) published a highly influential and damaging critique of the work, arguing that the theory could not explain the complexities of human language. This critique contributed to the cognitive approach displacing the behaviourist approach. (Anderson, p.24) Tolman was an influential critic of learning theories such as Thorndike’s. His main aim was to show that behaviour was best understood as a response to a goal. One of his more famous experiments was a study on latent learning. Tolman & Honjik (1930b) studied 3 groups of rats running a maze with 14 choice points, once a day for 17 days. Group 1 always found food at the end of the maze, group 2 never found food at the end of the maze and food was only introduced to group 3 on day 11. The results showed that the number of wrong choices group 3 made before reaching the end of the maze dramatically decreased on the 12th day and they even performed better than the group that was reinforced all along. Tolman concluded that the unreinforced rats had been learning all along but their learning was latent and was consequently only translated into performance when a goal was introduced. Thus, for Tolman, reinforcement was not necessary for learning but was necessary for performance. A second demonstration (Tolman, Ritchie, & Kalish, 1946) aimed to show that the rats learned a model of their environment, in this case a cognitive map, rather than a specific set of stimulus-response associations. In their experiment on place learning, one group of rats always found food by turning to the right. The other group always found food in a certain spot but depending on where they started either had to turn right or left. Tolman et al found that the rats learning to go to a place learned faster than the rats that were learning a constant response. As a result Tolman proclaimed that the rats learn locations in a cognitive map rather than specific responses. These results have been A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 23 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) replicated in other studies but others have found the response-learning rats do better. Restle (1957) suggested that rats could learn either cue-place or direction of turndepending on which of the two cues is more noticeable. Tolman, therefore, managed to show that it is not behaviour that is learned but rather knowledge that can be used to guide behaviour. He proposed that organisms learned means-ends readinesses or MERs. An MER was the expectation that certain choices would lead to certain results. However, until some goal was introduced these expectations remained hidden. The major criticism of Tolman’s theory was that he never explained how goals energised them into action. This problem led Guthrie (1952), an orthodox behaviourist, to complain that Tolman left his rat in the maze buried in thought. Tolman’s studies opened the door for more cognitively oreientated research on animal learning although at the time he insisted that his ideas were compatible with behaviourism. (Anderson, p.18-20) In summary, the two perspectives have resulted in two different traditions for studying learning. The behaviourally orientated tradition focuses on animal learning and the cognitively orientated tradition focuses on human memory. However, the distinction between the two approaches has begun to break down. Current research on animal learning tends to have a strong cognitive orientation and behaviouristic learning theories have begun to be used again in human memory research, for example, the learning phenomena of conditioning that Pavlov and Thorndike had discovered in animals were applied by human memory researchers to investigations of forgetting in the pairedassociate paradigm. The original learning of the associations has also been viewed as analogous to acquisition and forgetting has come to be seen as similar in some respects to extinction. References Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Breland, K., & Breland, M. (1951). A field of applied animal psychology. American Psychologist, 6, 202-204, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 24 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour. Language, 35, 26-58, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. Ebbinghaus, H. (1913) Memory: a contribution to experimental psychology (H.A Ruger & C.E Bussenues, Trans.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original work published 1885) Cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory and Kintsch, W. (1970) Memory and Cognition. Guthrie, E.R. (1952) The psychology of learning (rev. ed.) New York: Harper & Row, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. Haberlandt, K. (1999) Human Memory Exploration and Application. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hunt, M. (1993) The Story of Psychology. New York: Doubleday. Kintsch, W. (1970) Memory and Cognition. New York: Doubleday. Pavlov, I. P. (1927) Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex, London: Oxford University Press, cited in Kintsch, W. (1970) Memory and Cognition. Skinner, B.F. (1938) The behaviour of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. Thorndike, E.L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological Monographs, 2 (whole No.8), cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. Tolman, E.C., & Honzik, C.H. (1930b). Introduction and removal of reward, and maze performance in rats. University of California Publ. Psychology, 36, 221-229, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. Tolman, E.C., Ritchie, B.F., & Kalish, D. (1946). Studies in spatial learning: II. Place learning versus response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 221-229, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 25 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 26 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Sample essay: 2 Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence from both fields. Learning is an “Experiential process resulting in the permanent change in behaviour that cannot be explained by temporary states, maturation or innate response tendencies” (Klein 1996 p2). Cognitivists believe that learning is believed learning organised internally and they study internal constructs involving thought and cognition. On the other hand behaviourists construct a psychology that is based purely on observable events, which are objective. They consider learning to be dependant on environment. Learning is through operant, classical or instrumental conditioning. Behaviourists view instrumental and operant conditioning as having a slight difference on the constructs they observe for each of these. Cognitivists view learning as through classical conditioning, operant (instrumental) conditioning or observational learning. Ivan Pavlov a Russian psychologist studied classical conditioning, which is a valid means of learning to both groups. In his classic studies Pavlov rang a bell each time before giving his dogs food and eventually the dogs were conditioned to salivate when they heard the bell in expectancy of food. Another way through which people learn is through operant conditioning, which was studied by Skinner. In his experiments Skinner put a pigeon in a ‘skinner box’, which had a key hidden in one of the walls. If the pigeon pecked on this key it would release food from the dispenser, which was outside the box. Behaviourists analyse this in terms of reinforcement – behaviours that are rewarded are continued. Reinforcement occurs when the consequence of a response increases the likelihood that the response will be repeated. Edward Tolman a cognitivist argued otherwise when he revealed that rats could develop a cognitive map of running a maze in their brains without any reinforcement. Cognitivists A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 27 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) focus on what happens internally during learning contrary to behaviourists who study learning in terms of observable behaviours. Behaviourists differentiate instrumental and operant conditioning by studying instrumental conditioning in terms of response (neutral response leads to positive outcome and is learnt) while operant conditioning is studied in terms of reinforcement. Thorndike studied instrumental conditioning and put across the idea of reinforcement being necessary in learning. He placed a cat in a puzzle box and put food outside which it could only reach out to if it escaped from the box. Instrumental conditioning occurred through trial and error. The conditioning follows the law of effect that says satisfaction increases and decreases the probability of behaviour to be repeated. (M. Eysenk 1996) Learning also follows the law of exercise, which says that a response will become strongly connected to stimuli with repetition (Thorndike 1898) People are able to do things they have never done before but have only seen being done before for example opening a wine bottle. This is a cognitive learning that theorist Albert Bandura (1965, 1992) calls observational learning. Ability to perform a certain task is acquired through observing others do it. In his study of observational learning Bandura showed young boys and girls a short film of an adult behaving aggressively towards a bobo doll. After watching this children were taken into a room with several toys including a bobo doll and they replicated the aggressive behaviour. A control group that had not seen the film did not behave aggressively towards the doll. (B Smith 1996) Behaviour had been learnt merely by observation. Observational learning, which is cognitive, can take place even without reinforcement, which is viewed, as so necessary in operant and classical conditioning. Many psychologists view both classical and operant conditioning as too mechanical and simplistic to account for learning of complex behaviours argue that a number of cognitive processes are involved in thought and acquiring, modifying and acting on knowledge affect learning. (Weiner 1991) Edward Tolman argued that rats could learn how to run a maze as they repeatedly run through the maze. This is similar to a person who has just moved into anew city and after repeatedly walking from home to the bus stop they A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 28 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) develop a ‘mental map.’ Tolman introduced the concept of latent learning when he concluded that rats learned cognitively but did not show their knowledge until a reward was offered. For cognitivists learning involves memory and as revealed by George Miller (1948) short term memory has properties that can only be explained in terms of internal events. Some skill like language cannot be acquired or learnt simply through a stimulus response process. Language for example is learnt based on a specialised neural system that is innate. Noam Chomsky a psycholinguist argued that children could generate sentences they had never had before opposing the behaviourist view that all things are learnt through observable events. Thus children’s language development cannot be explained merely by behaviourist principles because children’s vocabulary develops faster than could be accomplished by simple learning. Karl Lashley (1948) also argued against the behaviourist view of learning because he says the brain is always active even in the absence of stimulation. As opposed to behaviourism which views learning as simply through observable events cognitivists view learning as through higher mental processes including cognition. They look in between the stimulus response relationship which behaviourists view as a rather mechanical process. References Rob Ellis, Glyn Humphrey 1999 connectionist psychology Psychology press publishers Michael W Eysneck 2000 Psychology: a student’s handbook Psychology press Sussex Barry D Smith 1998 Psychology: Science and understanding McGraw group of companies United States A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 29 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 30 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Sample essay: 3 Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence from both fields. The word learning has the definition as the process by which relatively permanent changes occur in behavioural potential as a result of experience. Learning can also be referred to as the process of adaptation of behaviour to experience, and memory refers to the permanent record that underlines this adaptation. Learning is central to behaviourist conception, unlike cognitive who research a lot about memory and how our memory encodes, stores and retrieves. I feel both are as equally important as each other. We can look at both side to the argument, we will start with behaviourist. There are two kind of basic learning processes that exist: Operant and Paviovian. Behaviourism is an approach to psychology that emphasizes casting theories in terms of external behaviour rather than discussing the internal mechanisms responsible for the behaviour. Behaviourism was approached in the turn of the 20th century in the U.S.A. One reason for the early interest in learning was Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, of how natural selection had changed species so that they were better adapted to their environment, which is a process of learning. Behaviourist such as Pavlov researched the development theories with no reference to what might be happening in the mind. Pavlov theory was about conditioned reflex; he started this study by putting meat powder in a dog’s mouth and measured the salivation which is now known as classical conditioning. This type of learning was that if you get use to the conditions and as soon as the condition is introduced to you, you automatically react as it comes into view as you have become use to it and therefore you know what is going to happen. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 31 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Animal learning is the behaviourist orientation as is illustrated by Ivan Petrovich Pavlov. Pavlov also had a basic methodology with biologically significant such as unconditioned stimulus (US), which reflexively evokes some unconditioned response (UR). For example food is a US and salivation is a UR. The US is paired with a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS), such a bell. After a number of tests the CS acquires the ability to do the response by itself, this is called conditioned response. Ebbinghaus established experimental methodologies for studying memory phenomena, such as the retention curve and the learning curve. Ebbinghaus conducted an experiment that practising data, showing the total number of trials needs to master a set of lists as a function of the number of days of practice. This was quite important as he tested humans instead of animals and showed that it was possible for this type of experiment to be conducted. Another interesting theory is the learning curve which is a crucial activity in a human culture. The learning curve presents some of the most famous skill, as the skill is more practised; the skill undergoes dramatic changes, including great reductions in cognitive involvement. For example if you revise for a test a week before the test continuously until the test it is likely that you will remember more, as you encode, store and retrieve. Were as if you revise a day before, your brain has not had the chance to practise storing the information. This is based on operant conditioning which has 3 concepts: rein forcer, operant and discrimination. Extinction occurs when there is a negative contingency between the conditioned stimulus and the unconditioned. This learning curve has also been studied by Crossman who claims that “it takes a certain amount of time for nerve impulses to reach the brain receptor, such as the eye, and to go from the brain to effectors, such as the hand”. Thorndike was also a behaviourist who studied learning, but studied a rather different situation then Pavlov. Thorndike thought that a stimulus- response bond would be formed A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 32 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) whenever reinforcement followed emission of the response in the presence of the stimulus. Thorndike’s experimental apparatus, called a puzzle box. He put a hungry cat in a box with some food outside. If the cat hit the loop of wire, the door would fall open and the cat could escape and eat the food. Tolman was a behaviourist but did not agree with the way the psychologist were conducting their experiments. Tolman argument came at a cognitive point that behaviour was best understood as a response to a goal, and that is when he came with a model called the cognitive map. One of Tolman finds have made the most impact upon me that “it is not behaviour that is learned but rather knowledge that can be used to guide behaviour”. For instance a footballer found that shooting the ball in to the opponent’s box would lead to them scoring a goal, and maybe wining the game. The cognitive map is the mental representation of the layout of objects and routes in a given space that an organism can use to guide the captive to be released. Keller also studied learning but at a different angle and more tradition for a behaviourist; of mastery learning for example significant instructional gains can be achieved by ensuring that students have mastered earlier material before progressing to later material. A student must continue practising even when mastered the process of learning in order to succeed. Cognitive had a more different approach to analysis instructional material into its cognitive components enables more effective instruction to be condensed. This is a very significant as a behaviourist and cognitive have similarities and do use each others theories. Cognitive is some what different but doing look at the behavioural side for similarities. Cognitivism is an approach to psychology that involves abstract description of the information processing mechanisms responsible for behaviour. Where as behaviourist look at the internal mechanisms responsible for behaviour, but both look at the mechanisms responsible for behaviour. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 33 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) In the 1950’s cognitivism and behaviourist as psychologist began to shift, cognitive thought that behaviourist had created too simple a picture of human cognition. Cognitive psychologist where similar some what with behaviourist because they both began studying learning, but were they differed was that the cognitive psychologist did so in the guise of so called memory experiments on humans were as behaviourist would conduct their experiments on animals. So this divided the two into behaviourally orientated studies of animals and cognitively oriented of human memory. Cognitivism positions the complex mental process played in shaping human behaviour, and much of the field shifted to studying these mental process. Cognitive came u with a theory that memory is the record of the experience that underlies learning. John Watson had a very different view from cognition he claimed that “there is no such thing as memory and that people just learned the way of behaving”. Much more recent research has had the behaviourist having a more cognitive orientation when testing animal learning and vicea-virsa that cognitive have had a more behaviouristic learning theory in research on human memory. In conclusion there are a lot of similarities and differences in the way behaviourist and cognitive explain learning. Their most obvious difference is the way they conduct experiments and what they are concentrating on. Behaviourists conduct their experiments on animals and learning through behaviour, where as cognitive conduct their experiments on humans and concentrate on the memory side of learning. But each is not without its criticism. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 34 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources (Version April 2004) Reference Thorndike, E.L. (1968). Human learning. New York: Johnson Reprint Crop. (original work published 1928-1929) Tolman, E.C. (1967). Purposive behaviour in animals and men. New York: Irvington. (Original work published 1932) Leahey, T.H. (2001). Learning and Cognition. Texas: R.R. Donnelly & Sons Co. (Original work published 1980) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 35 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 36 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) EVALUATION OF THE WORKSHOP PROGRAMME We have tried to design a programme of workshops that is founded in past experience and research findings, but of course that is no guarantee it will work! The Assessment Plus team is keen to improve the workshops in response to student and staff feedback. Included on the next pages are two types of student feedback form and one staff evaluation form. Should you choose to use any of these forms (or a modified version of them to suit your particular needs), the Assessment Plus team will be happy to receive them; we will analyse the data for you and return a brief summary report for your own use. Subject to the usual condition of ensuring that no individual and no institution is identified, the Assessment Plus team would ask that these data might also be used in research publications. Overview of evaluation forms The first type of student evaluation form has been designed to be delivered after each workshop session. There is one form for each session, and the questions relate specifically to the aims and learning outcomes of the individual sessions. The second type of student evaluation form has been designed to be delivered at the end of a series of workshop sessions. The questions on this form focus on getting students’ opinions on whether or not the workshops helped them to understand the meaning and importance of essay assessment criteria and the relevance they think the workshops will have for their future work and performance. The staff evaluation form includes questions that largely mirror those asked in the second type of student evaluation form. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 37 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 38 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Student Evaluation Form Workshop 5: ‘Becoming more expert in your essay writing’ (Applying the Criteria to Your Own Work) Student ID Number _________________ University ____________________________ Subject(s) of Study ________________________________________________________ Gender: Male / Female (please circle) Age: Under 21 / 21-25 / 25+ (please circle) (The above details are required for the purposes of data analysis only. Results of this evaluation will be presented in reports as overall percentages, so no individual will ever be identified.) _______________________________________________________________________ This questionnaire has been designed to find out how successful you think we have been in helping you achieve the specific aims of this workshop. To do this in a way that will help us modify and improve this workshop, we have identified the aims and the learning outcomes (i.e. what we hope you’ve learned). What we need to know is if you think they have worked or not for YOU, so please be absolutely honest! For each outcome circle the one response that most accurately reflects what you feel you have learned, where Y = Yes definitely, NS = Not sure, N = No definitely not, DU = don’t understand. Having completed this workshop: I am able to identify strengths and weaknesses in my essays. Please circle Y NS N DU I am able to identify areas in my essay writing that need further work. Y NS N DU I know what steps to take to work on those areas that need improving. Y NS N DU I understand how what I have learned in the workshop programme can be applied to my own work. I know how to benefit from my tutors’ feedback. Y NS N DU Y NS N DU Continued . . . A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 39 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Student responses are an important and valued part of our continuing development of the workshops programme. If you wish to make any additional suggestions that you think might help us, please use the space below. Which were the most helpful aspects of this workshop? Which were the least successful aspects? How could this workshop be improved? How will what you have learned help you with your essay writing? Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this questionnaire! A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 40 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Assessment Criteria Workshops: Student Feedback Questionnaire Assessment Workshops are an experimental form of small group learning developed by the Assessment Plus project. Student feedback is an important part of the evaluation and further development of the workshops and related initiatives, so we are extremely grateful for information about your experiences. 1. What did you think when you first found out about the workshops? 2. How many of the workshops did you attend? None One Two Three Four All five 3. When you did not attend workshops, what was the main reason? Please tick a box to show how much you agree or disagree with each statement. Strongly Disagree disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 4. The workshops helped me to understand what assessment criteria are. 5. The workshops helped me to understand what makes a good essay. 6. The workshops confused me about what makes a good essay. 7. The workshops helped me to understand my subject. 8. The workshops helped me to prepare for the module assessment. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 41 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Strongly Disagree disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 9. The workshops will help me to write better essays. 10. The workshops will help me achieve a better grade in future essays. 11. The workshops will help me to make better use of feedback from tutors on my essays. 12. The workshops helped me to study more effectively. 13. The workshops were useful only for university writing. 14. The workshops were useful for writing outside university. 15. The workshop on what assessment criteria are was useful (workshop 1). 16. The workshop on addressing the question and structuring an answer was useful (workshop 2). 17. The workshop on demonstrating understanding and developing argument was useful (workshop 3). 18. The workshop on use of evidence and evaluation was useful (workshop 4). 19. The workshop on applying the criteria to my own work was useful (workshop 5). A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 42 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Strongly Disagree disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 20. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘address the question’ in an essay. 21. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘structure’ an essay. 22. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘demonstrate understanding’ in an essay. 23. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘develop an argument’ in an essay. 24. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘use evidence’ in an essay. 25. The workshops helped me understand how to ‘critically evaluate’ in an essay. 26. The workshops helped me understand how to use appropriate language in an essay. 27. The workshops helped me understand how to identify strengths and weaknesses in my own writing. 28. The workshops helped me feel more confident about writing at university. 29. The workshops made me feel more anxious about writing at university. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 43 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) 30. Please indicate how much of what you learned in the workshops was new to you? None of it Some of it About half of it Most of it All of it 31. What would you say to a student considering joining one of these workshops in the future? 32. What was good about the workshops, or went well? 33. What was poor about the workshops, or went badly? 34. What was missing from the workshops, or should have been included? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS! A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 44 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Assessment workshops: Staff feedback questionnaire Assessment workshops are an experimental form of small group learning developed by the Assessment Plus project. Staff feedback is an important part of the evaluation and further development of the workshops and related initiatives, so we are very keen to hear your views and appreciate detailed responses wherever possible. 1. What did you think when you first found out about the workshops? 2. Please list the workshops/activities that you delivered, along with any specific comments you wish to make (e.g., on their relevance, accessibility, ease of delivery, etc.). (Please attach a separate sheet if that is more convenient.) A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 45 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) In the following section, we ask for your views on how students responded to the workshops and the value you think the workshops had for students. Please tick a box to show how much you agree or disagree with each statement. Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 3. The workshops helped students to understand what assessment criteria are. 4. The workshops helped students to understand what makes a good essay. 5. The workshops confused students about what makes a good essay. 6. The workshops helped students to understand their subject. 7. The workshops helped students to prepare for the module assessment. 8. The workshops will help students to write better essays. 9. The workshops will help students achieve a better grade in future essays. 10. The workshops will help students to make better use of feedback from tutors on their essays. 11. The workshops will help students to study more effectively. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 46 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 12. Students responded positively to the workshops. 13. Students found the workshop on what assessment criteria are useful (workshop 1). 14. Students found the workshop on addressing the question and structuring the answer useful (workshop 2). 15. Students found the workshop on demonstrating understanding and developing argument useful (workshop 3). 16. Students found the workshop on use of evidence and evaluation useful (workshop 4). 17. Students found the workshop on applying the criteria to their own work useful (workshop 5). 18. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘address the question’ in an essay. 19. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘structure’ an essay. 20. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘demonstrate understanding’ in an essay. A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 47 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 21. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘develop an argument’ in an essay. 22. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘use evidence’ in an essay. 23. The workshops helped students understand how to ‘critically evaluate’ in an essay. 24. The workshops helped students understand how to use appropriate language in an essay. 25. The workshops helped students understand how to identify strengths and weaknesses in their own writing. 26. The workshops helped students feel more confident about writing at university. 27. The workshops made students feel more anxious about writing at university. Continued . . . A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 48 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) 28. Please list the kind of verbal feedback you received from students about any aspect of the workshops. In this section we ask for your views on the design and purpose of the workshops and on their effectiveness in facilitating teaching. Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree 29. The workshops seemed useful only for university writing. 30. The workshops seemed useful for writing outside university. Please attach a separate sheet if that is more convenient. 31. Generally, what do you think worked well about the workshops? A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 49 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation (Version April 2004) 32. Generally, what do you think went badly? 33. Would you recommend removing any aspects or activities from the workshops? 34. Would you recommend adding anything? 35. Would you recommend these workshops to future students? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS! A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 50 A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - References (Version April 2004) REFERENCES Norton, L., Clifford, R., Hopkins, L., Toner, I., & Norton, J.C.W. (2002). Helping psychology students write better essays. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 2 (2), 116-126. Norton, L.S. & Norton, J.C.W. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students improve their academic writing? Paper and workshop given at the first international conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing across Europe (EATAW), Groningen, 18-20 June 2001. [Copy of paper can be obtained from the first author.] A+ Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning HEFCE funded consortium project 51