Food for thought

From: Richard Walters (rfwalters@ucdavis.edu)
Date: Tue Aug 07 2001 - 20:45:27 PDT

  • Next message: Gilda Garcia: "Fwd: NLII Fellowship Applications"

    I'm not sure how many of you subscribe to the Learning MarketSpace,
    but the first article in tis month's issue online is quite thought-
    provoking. I will delete the remainder, less interesting to me at
    least, so that you can focus on what Ohio State is doing in an
    introductory Statistics course to use technology and innovation to
    target 3,000 students in a customized form. read on, please.

    dick walters

    Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 15:47:42 -0400
    To: LFORUM-L@lists.rpi.edu
    From: "Carol A. Twigg" <twiggc@rpi.edu>
    Subject: The Learning MarketSpace, August 1, 2001

    ****************************************************************************
    Written monthly by Bob Heterick and Carol Twigg, The Learning
    MarketSpace provides leading-edge assessment of and future-oriented
    thinking about issues and developments concerning the nexus of
    higher education and information technology.

    ****************************************************************************
    FOOD FOR THOUGHT

    In the October 2000 issue of The Learning MarketSpace, we discussed
    the phenomenon of =93technique lagging behind technology.=94 We
    observed that most of today=92s Web-based courses represent simple
    transferences of techniques designed for the on-campus classroom to
    the on-line environment. Rather than replicating what we=92ve done in the
    past, we said, let=92s think about how to create new learning environments
    that take advantage of the capabilities of communications technologies
    and the Internet.

    Our colleagues at Ohio State University are doing just that. Under the
    auspices of the Pew Grant Program in Course Redesign, OSU plans to
    redesign Introductory Statistical Concepts, a five-credit course enrolling
    3,250 students each year. And in the process, they have come up with a
    new metaphor that captures how we ought to be thinking about online
    learning environments.

    Ohio State=92s redesign will implement a =93buffet=94 strategy, offering=
     students
    an assortment of interchangeable paths that match their individual
    learning styles, abilities, and tastes to approach each stage of the course
    and learn each course objective. Like the emporium metaphor employed
    by Virginia Tech, a =93buffet=94 suggests a large variety of offerings that=
     can
    be customized to fit the needs of the individual learner.

    OSU develops the metaphor as follows. Research in learning theory tells
    us that students are more likely to comprehend and retain the concepts
    under study when they have 1) a real, vivid, and familiar example to
    anchor the concept, 2) a second less familiar example to demonstrate
    wide applicability to alternate contexts, 3) a means to discover the
    general principle, and 4) practice working with the concept. These four
    stages are the appetizer, salad, entree, and dessert of a full meal. Since
    students learn in different ways, even the best =93fixed-menu=94 of teaching
    strategies will fail for some students, even if those strategies offer the
    =93full meal=94 of these four learning stages for every course goal.

    In contrast, OSU=92s =93buffet=94 of learning opportunities will include=
     lectures,
    individual discovery laboratories (in-class and Web-based), team/group
    discovery laboratories, individual and group review (both live and
    remote), small group study sessions, videos, remedial/pre-
    requisite/procedure training modules, contacts for study groups, oral and
    written presentations, active large-group problem-solving, homework
    assignments (TA graded or self-graded), and individual and group
    projects. Thus, for a specific objective, students may choose to hear and
    discuss a familiar vivid example in lecture, view and read about a real
    example in an annotated video presentation, encounter an example in a
    group problem-solving session, or generate an example through a group
    project. Students may elect to practice working with a concept in a data
    analysis laboratory, in an individual Web-based activity, in a facilitated
    study session, or by explaining it to others in a jigsaw-formatted review.

    The buffet strategy can also accommodate choice in the sequence in
    which these four stages are presented. For example, it will match the
    learning style of students who learn better by starting with the big picture
    and moving to specific examples as well as students who learn by
    starting with specifics and moving to the general principle.

    To promote commitment to follow-through and to enable efficient tracking
    of their progress, students will enter into an online "contract" that
    captures their choice of learning modes at the beginning of each of four
    units of study. Students will receive an initial in-class orientation that
    provides information about the buffet structure, the course content, the
    learning contract, the purpose of the learning styles and study skills
    assessments, and the various ways that they might choose to learn the
    material. Out of class, they will complete online learning styles and study
    skills instruments and receive a report of their results as well as
    directions on how to use this information to build the online course
    contract.

    Students will initially be given a set of default study options generated by
    software to match their learning styles and study skills, which can be
    changed according to student preferences. The finished contract will give
    each student a detailed listing of what needs to be accomplished, how it
    relates to the learning objectives of the unit and when each part of the
    assignment must be completed, leading up to the unit test three weeks
    later. Based on their own experiences in the initial unit and on reading
    student testimonials from earlier quarters, students may decide to make
    changes in their contracts for subsequent units.

    The course software will monitor student progress on an individualized
    basis throughout each unit, providing a variety of learning activities and
    suggesting alternate learning strategies. For example, if a student
    shows a deficiency in a low-stakes quiz, the software will suggest an
    alternate approach to learning the objective involved. In one case, she
    may be directed to a study session covering the topic involved. In a
    second case, she may be directed to an applet activity that was not
    included in her original assignment.

    Teaching styles and capabilities also vary, and the buffet approach
    allows Ohio State to better match the TAs who support the course with
    the delivery options for which they have a talent. TAs who do well in
    one-on-one help but have not yet mastered the management of whole
    class discussions can facilitate study sessions or provide individual help
    during problem-solving sessions. TAs who have a talent for facilitating
    small group discussions and managing the dynamics of a hands-on
    laboratory experiment should utilize these skills and not be overburdened
    with grading duties. This supply side match, coupled with the student
    demand side match, will greatly individualize the instructional process
    even though the course has a very large enrollment.

    Using technology to manage course administration and monitor weekly
    progress reports and diagnostics will also allow OSU to move to a
    modular course format. Students will be able to earn from one to five
    credits based on successful module completion. By requiring students to
    demonstrate a passing level proficiency in one unit before proceeding to
    the next, severe deficiencies will be identified and addressed early,
    resulting in a lower failure/withdrawal rate. Thus, the several hundred
    students who now fall behind and feel compelled to withdraw will have
    the option of demonstrating proficiency without having to drop all five
    credits. Analysis of previous data on drops shows that OSU will be able
    to eliminate one-fourth of the course repetitions, thereby opening slots
    for an additional 150 students per year.

    Two factors in Ohio State=92s strategy are key: the collective commitment
    of the statistics faculty to work on the course as a whole and the
    capabilities provided by information technology. Would it be possible for
    a single professor offering an online class to develop such a creative,
    comprehensive, learner-centered design? Perhaps, if he spent most of
    his career working on it. Would it be possible for Ohio State to offer this
    buffet of learning opportunities to more than 3,000 students annually
    without the aid of information technology? Most certainly not.

    Many believe that mass customization is emerging as the organizing
    business principle of the 21st century. Internet-based e-commerce now
    makes it possible, for example, for customers to order computers
    designed to their exact needs and specifications, obtain customized
    home mortgages and compile music CDs containing any combination of
    songs. By offering students a buffet of learning opportunities that may be
    customized to their learning needs, Ohio State is pointing the way to a
    21st century approach to online learning, one that, we believe, will soon
    make today=92s online fixed meals a distant memory.

    [For more information about Ohio State=92s redesign project, please see
    http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewGrant/RD3%20Award/Ohio.html.]

    --CAT

    _______________

    comments?
    dick walters

    --UAA25705.997241152/calla.cs.ucdavis.edu--



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 20:50:40 PDT