Download Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011

Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011): INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
Instructional
Strategy
LECTURES
(Nilson, p.113 –
125)
Key Features
Management
o Intro: set in course
context + transition
from prior topic +
grabber to open
(surprise, familiarity,
curiosity, suspense)
o Body: new material
focused on major
points; vary
organization of
material from point to
point
o Organizational
Outline: skeletal
outline [advance
organizer] for notes
 Visuals
 Vivid examples
 Restatements of
important points
o Conclusion: recap by
Ss; short quiz aids
retention
o Use of S responses
during lecture (higherorder Qs!) increases
engagement &
retention
o May provide lecture in digital/print
format as homework in advance of
session on the topic, with/instead of
reading(s), so class time is more
active.
o Employ enthusiastic, engaging
delivery style.
o Use 2-3 min. pause every 15 min. for
pair processing:
Pair – compare
Pair – compare – ask
Recall + (pair – compare)
Reflection/ reaction
Solve a problem
Multiple choice for S response
S pairs create multiple choice quiz
item on lecture
(Listen – recall – ask) + (pair –
compare) + answer
Pair/group graphic (mind map, etc)
Quick case study response
Pair/group, discuss
Pair/group, review
Correct error (based on lecture
content)
Complete sentence starter
Compare/contrast
Support a statement
Reorder steps
Draw conclusion
Paraphrase
Potential
Pitfalls
Lecture format
creates challenges
to promote deep
learning, changed
attitudes, critical
thinking, transfer.
Steep “forgetting
curve.”
Attention span
limits: 1st 15 min.
followed by
falling
engagement.
Advantages
Materials,
Preparation,
…
1. Determine S
learning
outcomes
2. One lecture, one
major topic
3. Avoid too
much, too fast
4. Pause for note
Effective way to
taking
convey facts. Use to:
5. Chunk: 10-15
o Model something
min.
Ss will then try
interspersed w/
o Provide
S activity (2 – 15
background
min)
o Adapt complex
6. Plan how to
info for specific Ss
recap overall
o Present info in a
lecture at end (2
new structure/
– 5 min)
organization
7. Instructor’s
o Integrate own pt of
lecture notes:
view with content
sketchy
o Present most
8. Prepare for
current research
student
o Pique desire for
responses
further learning
(hands, cards,
clickers…)
9. Teach notetaking skills
(outlines,
Cornell notes,
diagrams,
parsimony) +
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Notes by L. Adamson)
Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011): INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
Provide skeletal
lecture outline
for S note-taking
7th inning stretch!
o Integrate note-taking practices:
 Review prior notes
 Legibility + abbreviations
 Annotate for emphasis, importance
 Organize
 Draw/visually represent concepts
 Review soon, 1 wk, 1 month
Instructional
Strategy
Key Features
Management
o Management of Socratic method:
 Need to keep the discussion on
topic
 Avoid intimidating Ss
o Socratic method:
 Spread discussion among many Ss
questioning prompts
o Management of Outcome-based Qs:
taking positions,
 Begin discussion with an end-ofdefending them,
class question (establishes the
adjusting… Instructor
target)
QUESTIONING
as devil’s advocate
 Facilitate note taking in response
for
o Working backwards
to planned Qs
DISCUSSIONS
from learner
o Management of Bloom-based Qs:
(Nilson, p. 137 –
outcomes, ending with
 Begin at lower cognitive levels, but
144)
Qs that assess key
not simplistic
performances
 Plan Qs that assess Ss’ levels of
o Qs based on Bloom’s
mastery, correct misconceptions
Taxonomy
o McKeachie’s Categories:
o Typologies (categories,
 Comparative (key distinctions)
momentum, high Evaluative (effectiveness)
mileage
 Connective, causal effect (nonobvious connections & causality;
effective for cross-disciplinary)
 Critical (analytical look at validity)
Potential
Pitfalls
Advantages
Unstructured
o Promotes rich
Socratic method
discussion
can be a manage- o Integrates use of
ment challenge;
specialized
does not facilitate
vocabulary with
note taking.
discipline-based
thinking
Bloom-based Qs o Stimulates critical/
are situationother higher levels
specific: complex
of thinking
cases require
o Useful for assessing
complex interplay
learning
among levels of
o Best discussionQ; same type of
promoting Qs have
Q may represent
multiple reasonable
different
answers
cognitive levels in
different contexts NOT good for
discussion but
Brainstorming Qs possibly for recitation:
require witho Analytical
holding judgment
convergent: only
one correct answer
NOT effective:
o “Quiz show”:
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Notes by L. Adamson)
Materials,
Preparation,
…
Planning Qs to
match outcomes:
1. 1-2 Qs to assess
attainment of
each outcome
performance
2. For each: 2-3 Qs
to lead Ss up to
that key Q.
Planning for any
type of questioning
requires prethinking to be able
to guide discussion,
make best use of
assessment
opportunities
Have Ss generate
Qs on topics in
preparation for a
test review; use Ss’
Qs on the test.
Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011): INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
o Brookfield & Preskill’s “Momentum”
Qs:
 Seeking more evidence (defend a
position)
 Clarifying Qs (rephrase,
elaborate)
 Cause & effect: hypothesis
formation
 Hypothetical (what if?)
 Open Qs: no preferred answer!
 Linking/extension Qs: connects
Ss   Ss.
 Summary/synthesis
o Gale & Andrews’s “High-Mileage”
Types
 Brainstorming: idea generation
(4.3 responses/Q)
 Focal Qs: choose a position &
support it; basis of debates (4.9
responses/Q)
 Playground Qs: very
exploratory, interpretive (5.1
responses/Q)
Instructional
Strategy
LEARNING IN
GROUPS
(Nilson, p. 155 –
165)
Key Features
o Instructor is “the
guide on the side”
rather than “the sage
on the stage”
o Individual
accountability +
positive group
interdependence
o Role assignment
Management
o Management for positive
interdependence & individual
accountability:
 Group product that all members
must validate [+ individual
accountability for assigned
contributions]
 Group assessment components
[caution required here!]
o Fuzzy Qs:
unfocused,
unclear
o “Chameleon”
& “shotgun”
Qs
o Programmedanswer Qs
o Dead-end Qs:
Y/N response
Potential
Pitfalls
factual recall only
(though good for
review of factual
content)
Advantages
Requires that Ss o Equips and
develop
empowers learners
individual
to be self-directed,
knowledge and
demonstrates
skills as a
confidence in them
foundation for
as such.
meaningful group
work.
o Potential positive
effects in learning,
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Notes by L. Adamson)
Materials,
Preparation,
…
Requires high
levels of
preparation for
more than simple
pair-share tasks.
Requires explicit
attention to social
work skills and
Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011): INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
within group
Different collaborative
strategies:
o Think-pair-share
o Pairs check
o TAPPS (talking aloud
paired problem
solving)
o STAD (student teams
achievement
divisions): group
masters content so
any individual can
demonstrate success.
Creates incentive to
perform for the
team’s score.
o Jigsaw (base/home
groups + expert grps)
o Structured
controversy
o Group investigation
o Numbered heads
together (number
members of each
group; any number
can be called on to
respond to Qs for the
group)
o Talking chips:
method to ensure all
are heard.
o Send a problem (Q
on one side, alternative answers on back)
 Learning resources allocated to
require interaction among group
members for learning success
 Random assignment of certain
roles [may in fact be purposeful
on instructor ‘s part but appear
random to Ss]
 Group members must evaluate
each others’ contributions
 Allow for ability to change
group membership in response
to non-performance
 Facilitate group “contracting”
for expectations and potential
sanctions
o Group composition, size, duration:
 Heterogeneous – may be
defined on a variety of
characteristics
 Self-determined long-term
groups predisposes to negative
outcomes
 Group size varies by task; 2 – 5
generally allows best interactions
and productivity
 Group duration varies by task;
better communication is
facilitated by group consistency
over a number of weeks
Group processes
of any complexity
need to be
carefully
specified,
modeled &
monitored.
Might not benefit
highly able/
advance learners.
positive
interpersonal
relationships
(including interracial), &
psychological
health. Able to
enhance critical
thinking.
o Beneficial for
lecture breaks,
Learning must be
discussion starters,
enhanced by
experiential
group
learning, case
participation –
debriefing,
the group needs
problem-based
to be “valuelearning, lab work,
added” in the
review sessions.
learning.
Grade group
work using
criterionreferenced tools,
not normreferenced.
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Notes by L. Adamson)
relationship
building.
Build in
accountability for
group
communication
(peer editing,
feedback,
contributions to
group processing)
using course
website – requires
monitoring &
commenting to
ensure
accountability is
real.
Require S selfassessment of
contributions to
group project as
well as intra-group
assessment.
Set and maintain
deadlines.
Monitor how
group processing
impacts others in
the learning space
(noise level,
materials, activity).
Evidence-Based Teaching (Session 6, October 6, 2011): INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
o Group testing:
Individuals take most
of a test (receive
individual grade),
then team
collaborates on
remainder of test, all
members get grade
for that section.
Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Notes by L. Adamson)