Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Using “Family Groups“ in Psych 48 - Family Therapy
Read Janice Takahashi's Article on "Using “Family Groups“ in Psych 48 - Family Therapy" Click on the article title.
What is Accelerated Learning?
Read "What is Accelerated Learning?", by Lilia Becerra-Quintor, Mary Amezquita, Vickey Aubrey
WORKING PAPER ON TRANSFORMATIONAL LEARNING
Read Steve Graham's Article on "WORKING PAPER ON TRANSFORMATIONAL LEARNING", Click HERE
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Mini Grant Proposals Deadline
If you haven't submitted your Mini-Grant Proposal, you want to do so right away. The Deadline for submission is, Monday, April 4th, 2011.
CLICK HERE for Important Basic Skills Proposal and Logon Information
CLICK HERE for Important Basic Skills Proposal and Logon Information
On Course Workshop
If you were one of the lucky people to attend the On Course 1 Workshop on March 17 & 18, 2011, let us know what you thought.
Conference Articles
Several of you have attended Conferences this semester, and we need your articles. It would be nice to see yours in the April Student Success Newsletter.
Student Success Newsletter
Hopefully you are having a restful Spring Break. For your reading enjoyment, click on the link below and enjoy the March Student Success Newsletter.
Volume 3-Issue 6: March 2011
Volume 3-Issue 6: March 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
USING “FAMILY GROUPS” IN PSYCH 48 – FAMILY THERAPY
By Janice Takahashi, Student Success/Student Learning Outcomes Coordinator, Professor
San Joaquin Delta College
Over the winter break I thought about how I could better teach and engage my students in the learning process. I was not satisfied with the depth of their learning, especially since most of these students were preparing for careers as paraprofessionals in counseling. In spite of the fact that there are individual reflective writing assignments, individual hands-on creative projects and contextualized examples of theoretical information presented in my lectures, learning was still on the surface. I thought about group work projects instead of individual projects, additional assignments and different ways of giving feedback and then I stopped. I realized that I was going about it in all the wrong ways.
Click HERE for full Article
San Joaquin Delta College
Over the winter break I thought about how I could better teach and engage my students in the learning process. I was not satisfied with the depth of their learning, especially since most of these students were preparing for careers as paraprofessionals in counseling. In spite of the fact that there are individual reflective writing assignments, individual hands-on creative projects and contextualized examples of theoretical information presented in my lectures, learning was still on the surface. I thought about group work projects instead of individual projects, additional assignments and different ways of giving feedback and then I stopped. I realized that I was going about it in all the wrong ways.
Click HERE for full Article
How Rubrics Help Students Learn
Some history professors at Utah State have mapped out learning objectives, creating a detailed scoring guide for student papers. Here is how three seniors who are history majors say they have used the rubrics, which spell out how the professor will judge their mastery of specific skills and knowledge.
By Kristin Murphy for The Chronicle for Higher Education, November 28, 2010
Click here for full Article
By Kristin Murphy for The Chronicle for Higher Education, November 28, 2010
Click here for full Article
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Something's Got to Give - California can't improve college completions without rethinking developmental education at its community colleges
President Barack Obama has set a national goal that by 2020, “America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.” On Oct. 5, 2010, the president and the U.S. Department of Education underscored the central role community colleges play in this effort by hosting a White House Summit on Community College.
California’s community colleges are the single largest postsecondary system in the country, serving nearly a quarter of all community college students. It is clear that this new national challenge cannot be met unless California’s community colleges ramp up their student completion rates.
In order for more students to reach that finish line of college completion, California has to get more of them to the starting gate, ready and able to do college-level work. As open-access institutions, California’s community colleges play a crucial role in that effort. They are the main source of postsecondary education for the state’s high school graduates, but particularly for first generation college goers, many of whom are low-income and students of color. California’s community colleges hold out hope for a better future for the more than 2 million individuals they enroll each year.
Because of their commitment to open access, the community colleges serve huge numbers of students who are unprepared for college-level academic studies. Local campuses have responded to this by creating a variety of developmental education programs to help students learn the basic skills they need for college success. Over time, California’s longstanding tradition of local autonomy has resulted in a myriad of approaches to this righteous but often daunting challenge, some of which are more successful than others.
Students get mixed signals about what they need to do to prepare for community college and – after they enroll – are too often left to their own devices to figure out how to get the skills they need for college success.
State and national leaders say that increasing the number of students who graduate from high school ready for college and career is essential. But to meet the goal of more college completions, California’s community colleges must also strengthen developmental education.
That is particularly true if the state remains committed to maintaining the open-access mission it has assigned to the community colleges. But colleges are expected to improve their effectiveness at educating these unprepared students at a time when budget and enrollment pressures are constraining their capacity to respond.
Continuing to tackle the problems of readiness and remediation with the same strategies will simply not work. Something’s got to give.
This report draws from a recent EdSource Study that was commissioned by the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to provide a deeper understanding of the system’s challenges and opportunities related to developmental education. It provides some insights into how well the community colleges are currently positioned to respond to these pressures. It also details how students have moved through remedial course sequences in writing and mathematics, which students take these courses, and the extent to which their starting levels and course-taking behaviors appear to relate to their achievement of longterm academic goals.
California’s community colleges are the single largest postsecondary system in the country, serving nearly a quarter of all community college students. It is clear that this new national challenge cannot be met unless California’s community colleges ramp up their student completion rates.
In order for more students to reach that finish line of college completion, California has to get more of them to the starting gate, ready and able to do college-level work. As open-access institutions, California’s community colleges play a crucial role in that effort. They are the main source of postsecondary education for the state’s high school graduates, but particularly for first generation college goers, many of whom are low-income and students of color. California’s community colleges hold out hope for a better future for the more than 2 million individuals they enroll each year.
Because of their commitment to open access, the community colleges serve huge numbers of students who are unprepared for college-level academic studies. Local campuses have responded to this by creating a variety of developmental education programs to help students learn the basic skills they need for college success. Over time, California’s longstanding tradition of local autonomy has resulted in a myriad of approaches to this righteous but often daunting challenge, some of which are more successful than others.
Students get mixed signals about what they need to do to prepare for community college and – after they enroll – are too often left to their own devices to figure out how to get the skills they need for college success.
State and national leaders say that increasing the number of students who graduate from high school ready for college and career is essential. But to meet the goal of more college completions, California’s community colleges must also strengthen developmental education.
That is particularly true if the state remains committed to maintaining the open-access mission it has assigned to the community colleges. But colleges are expected to improve their effectiveness at educating these unprepared students at a time when budget and enrollment pressures are constraining their capacity to respond.
Continuing to tackle the problems of readiness and remediation with the same strategies will simply not work. Something’s got to give.
This report draws from a recent EdSource Study that was commissioned by the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to provide a deeper understanding of the system’s challenges and opportunities related to developmental education. It provides some insights into how well the community colleges are currently positioned to respond to these pressures. It also details how students have moved through remedial course sequences in writing and mathematics, which students take these courses, and the extent to which their starting levels and course-taking behaviors appear to relate to their achievement of longterm academic goals.
Click Here for Complete Report and/or Free Download
– From October 2010 EdSource Reports – Researched and written by:
Mary Perry, Deputy Director of EdSource and Study Project Director,
Matthew Resin, Ph.D., Senior Research Associate, EdSource, with
research support from: Kathryn Morgan Woodward, Research
Associate, EdSource, and Quantitative analysis by: Peter Bahr, Ph.D.,
Assistant Professor, School of Education, University of Michigan.
My Students Won’t Read! Part Two: The Three Levels of Reading Comprehension
Before I was able to create any shift in my students’ attitude toward reading, I had to understand what they experienced when confronted with unfamiliar texts. It dawned on me that I had once been in a similar predicament.
After completing my undergraduate coursework in mathematics, I thought it would be cool to return to school and study “something fun” such as literature. I naively entered a graduate program in English and signed up for a couple of graduate seminars. The reading was heavy, but I enjoyed it. I’ll never forget coming to class all prepared (so I thought) to “talk about” Wieland, the first novel of the semester. I had rehearsed its complicated story line, itemized its characters, and carefully determined the book’s theme. However, the ensuing discussion left me in the dust. Only much later did I realize what had happened. My classmates were discussing the book from all three levels of comprehension whereas I was stuck at Level One.
The Three Levels
1. Literal comprehension: what does it say?
This is the skeletal starting point, consisting of a text’s main idea (or thesis or theme) and major supporting details. It answers the overt WHO, WHAT, WHERE, and WHEN questions. Yet even literal comprehension is challenging if the text contains difficult vocabulary or if the reader is unfamiliar with the subject matter. Most of our students are at (or still struggling with) this level of reading comprehension.
2. Interpretive comprehension: what does it mean?
Here we ask HOW and WHY the text is organized the way it is. We must consider the author’s tone, bias, inferences, audience, and purpose. Since these are usually implicit rather than explicit, they require a more sophisticated understanding.
3. Critical analysis: what is our evaluation?
Only after moving through the first two levels can we decide what the text means to us individually and as a community of readers. Do we agree with the author? Do we approve of the manner of presentation? Will it move us to action of any kind?
Decision Time for the Professor
Given these three levels of reading comprehension—and the fact that moving up the scale is no simple matter—instructors must make choices. First, what level of comprehension is necessary? Will literal comprehension be sufficient? This will vary from discipline to discipline. In a basic anatomy class, it is probably sufficient for students to learn the various body parts and their functions. Nurses don’t need to ponder very deeply whether or not the organs of the human body might be arranged in a more optimal manner. (Surgeons and bio-engineers, however, will certainly do so.) Wherever bias is possible, as in the social sciences, level one comprehension will not be sufficient.
Instructors must also have a clear understanding of the purpose of their reading assignments. It is not enough to ask students to read the textbook simply because this is customary. Here then are some questions for reflection: Will the textbook provide information that students will not receive in lecture? Is it intended to reinforce what students hear in lecture? Or is it intended to introduce lecture material? The answers to these questions will determine whether a textbook is really needed and, if so, how it ought to be used. If the textbook is one that students will want to keep as a lifelong reference book, there is very good reason for wanting them to develop extreme familiarity with it. How to do so will be the topic of Part Three, our final installment.
After completing my undergraduate coursework in mathematics, I thought it would be cool to return to school and study “something fun” such as literature. I naively entered a graduate program in English and signed up for a couple of graduate seminars. The reading was heavy, but I enjoyed it. I’ll never forget coming to class all prepared (so I thought) to “talk about” Wieland, the first novel of the semester. I had rehearsed its complicated story line, itemized its characters, and carefully determined the book’s theme. However, the ensuing discussion left me in the dust. Only much later did I realize what had happened. My classmates were discussing the book from all three levels of comprehension whereas I was stuck at Level One.
The Three Levels
1. Literal comprehension: what does it say?
This is the skeletal starting point, consisting of a text’s main idea (or thesis or theme) and major supporting details. It answers the overt WHO, WHAT, WHERE, and WHEN questions. Yet even literal comprehension is challenging if the text contains difficult vocabulary or if the reader is unfamiliar with the subject matter. Most of our students are at (or still struggling with) this level of reading comprehension.
2. Interpretive comprehension: what does it mean?
Here we ask HOW and WHY the text is organized the way it is. We must consider the author’s tone, bias, inferences, audience, and purpose. Since these are usually implicit rather than explicit, they require a more sophisticated understanding.
3. Critical analysis: what is our evaluation?
Only after moving through the first two levels can we decide what the text means to us individually and as a community of readers. Do we agree with the author? Do we approve of the manner of presentation? Will it move us to action of any kind?
Decision Time for the Professor
Given these three levels of reading comprehension—and the fact that moving up the scale is no simple matter—instructors must make choices. First, what level of comprehension is necessary? Will literal comprehension be sufficient? This will vary from discipline to discipline. In a basic anatomy class, it is probably sufficient for students to learn the various body parts and their functions. Nurses don’t need to ponder very deeply whether or not the organs of the human body might be arranged in a more optimal manner. (Surgeons and bio-engineers, however, will certainly do so.) Wherever bias is possible, as in the social sciences, level one comprehension will not be sufficient.
Instructors must also have a clear understanding of the purpose of their reading assignments. It is not enough to ask students to read the textbook simply because this is customary. Here then are some questions for reflection: Will the textbook provide information that students will not receive in lecture? Is it intended to reinforce what students hear in lecture? Or is it intended to introduce lecture material? The answers to these questions will determine whether a textbook is really needed and, if so, how it ought to be used. If the textbook is one that students will want to keep as a lifelong reference book, there is very good reason for wanting them to develop extreme familiarity with it. How to do so will be the topic of Part Three, our final installment.
For the full Article, Click HERE
Source--Patrick Wall, English/Reading Instructor, San Joaquin Delta Community College
9 Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning
1. The assessment of student learning begins with educational values. Assessment is not an end in itself but a vehicle for educational improvement. Its effective practice, then, begins with and enacts a vision of the kinds of learning we most value for students and strive to help them achieve. Educational values should drive not only what we choose to assess but also how we do so. Where questions about educational mission and values are skipped over, assessment threatens to be an exercise in measuring what's easy, rather than a process of improving what we really care about.
2. Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time. Learning is a complex process. It entails not only what students know but what they can do with what they know; it involves not only knowledge and abilities but values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect both academic success and performance beyond the classroom. Assessment should reflect these understandings by employing a diverse array of methods, including those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as to reveal change, growth, and increasing degrees of integration. Such an approach aims for a more complete and accurate picture of learning, and therefore firmer bases for improving our students' educational experience.
3. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes. Assessment is a goal-oriented process. It entails comparing educational performance with educational purposes and expectations – those derived from the institution's mission, from faculty
intentions in program and course design, and from knowledge of students' own goals. Where program purposes lack specificity or agreement, assessment as a process pushes a campus toward clarity about where to aim and what standards to apply; assessment also prompts attention to where and how program goals will be taught and learned. Clear, shared, implementable goals are the cornerstone for assessment that is focused and useful.
4. Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those outcomes. Information about outcomes is of high importance; where students "end up" matters greatly. But to improve outcomes, we need to know about student experience along the way -- about the curricula, teaching, and kind of student effort that lead to particular outcomes. Assessment can help us understand which students learn best under what conditions; with such knowledge comes the capacity to improve the whole of their learning.
5. Assessment works best when it is ongoing not episodic. Assessment is a process whose power is cumulative. Though isolated, "one-shot" assessment can be better than none, improvement is best fostered when assessment entails a linked series of activities undertaken over time.
Authors: Alexander W. Astin; Trudy W. Banta; K. Patricia Cross; Elaine El-Khawas; Peter T. Ewell; Pat Hutchings; Theodore J. Marchese; Kay M. McClenney; Marcia Mentkowski; Margaret A. Miller; E. Thomas Moran; Barbara D. Wright.
This document was developed under the auspices of the AAHE Assessment Forum (Barbara Cambridge is Director) with support from the Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education with additional support for publication and dissemination from the Exxon Education Foundation. Copies may be made without restriction. AAHE site maintained by: Mary C. Schwarz mjoyce@aahe.org
Click HERE to read the entire
2. Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time. Learning is a complex process. It entails not only what students know but what they can do with what they know; it involves not only knowledge and abilities but values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect both academic success and performance beyond the classroom. Assessment should reflect these understandings by employing a diverse array of methods, including those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as to reveal change, growth, and increasing degrees of integration. Such an approach aims for a more complete and accurate picture of learning, and therefore firmer bases for improving our students' educational experience.
3. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes. Assessment is a goal-oriented process. It entails comparing educational performance with educational purposes and expectations – those derived from the institution's mission, from faculty
intentions in program and course design, and from knowledge of students' own goals. Where program purposes lack specificity or agreement, assessment as a process pushes a campus toward clarity about where to aim and what standards to apply; assessment also prompts attention to where and how program goals will be taught and learned. Clear, shared, implementable goals are the cornerstone for assessment that is focused and useful.
4. Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those outcomes. Information about outcomes is of high importance; where students "end up" matters greatly. But to improve outcomes, we need to know about student experience along the way -- about the curricula, teaching, and kind of student effort that lead to particular outcomes. Assessment can help us understand which students learn best under what conditions; with such knowledge comes the capacity to improve the whole of their learning.
5. Assessment works best when it is ongoing not episodic. Assessment is a process whose power is cumulative. Though isolated, "one-shot" assessment can be better than none, improvement is best fostered when assessment entails a linked series of activities undertaken over time.
Authors: Alexander W. Astin; Trudy W. Banta; K. Patricia Cross; Elaine El-Khawas; Peter T. Ewell; Pat Hutchings; Theodore J. Marchese; Kay M. McClenney; Marcia Mentkowski; Margaret A. Miller; E. Thomas Moran; Barbara D. Wright.
This document was developed under the auspices of the AAHE Assessment Forum (Barbara Cambridge is Director) with support from the Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education with additional support for publication and dissemination from the Exxon Education Foundation. Copies may be made without restriction. AAHE site maintained by: Mary C. Schwarz mjoyce@aahe.org
Click HERE to read the entire
Monday, October 4, 2010
My Students Won't - Read Part 1: The Reason Why
“Do you think this class will be a lot of work?”
“I don’t think so. I’ve heard that the prof is really nice.”
“How much did you pay for the textbook?”
“Almost $100! I wonder if I’ll really need it.”
“I doubt it. My friend took this class last semester and got a C+ just from going to lecture.”
“So are you planning to buy the textbook?”
“No way! This teacher covers all the important stuff in lecture anyway.”
It’s hard to argue with such student logic. After all, many of our students have made it into college with only the most rudimentary of language skills. Every semester, they aim for that “barely passing” grade, and most of the time they achieve it. Certainly there are exceptions. For example, my office neighbor teaches a course that is prerequisite for entry to the nursing program. When he arrives for work in the morning, he has students lined up outside his office waiting to ask questions about the homework assignment. However, this is not the norm at Delta—or at most community colleges.
If we faculty are going to challenge the status quo, we have our work cut out for us. It is with embarrassment that I relate the following story.
Some years ago, while teaching college-level English, I concluded that weak reading skills were largely responsible for the educational lethargy of my students. So I went back to graduate school, received training in reading education, and returned, eager to tackle prevailing attitudes. I signed up to teach my first reading course and found a text, The Fight in the Fields, that was both interesting and culturally relevant to my students. This book chronicled the rise of Cesar Chavez and the farmworker movement right here in the San Joaquin Valley.
In Part Two, we'll examine the three levels of reading comprehension, appreciate why reading is such hard work for students, and make clear what we faculty must do to change this paradigm.
For the full - Part 1, Click HERE
Source--Patrick Wall, English/Reading Instructor, San Joaquin Delta Community College
Friday, September 3, 2010
Learning with Letters
Some 12-14 years ago I became disgusted with myself for falling asleep (or at least into a dull hypnotic trance) while reading yet another batch of essays from my upper-division Shakespeare students. It finally occurred to me, as a late-life epiphany, that my malaise was not the fault of the students, but rather my own. After all, they had simply delivered what I asked for: safe, careful, traditional essays on topics that the students knew that I understood better than they. And so I got the typical protective prose (passive voice everywhere and cautious thoughts at every turn: "as one can see," “it may be conjectured here that," "possibly Shakespeare meant," and so on, ad nauseam.) I therefore determined to strip the students of the double vulnerabilities OF HAVING TO PRETEND TO BE SHAKESPEARE SCHOLARS WRITING FOR AN AUDIENCE EVEN MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN THEY THEMSELVES WERE. If pretense was the rhetorical game, why not put them into positions, postures, angles closer to their "real" personae and language styles--or even into different characters (Shakespearean or not) that would free them to use a less artificial rhetoric to raise revealing--and readable!--arguments about the nature of the players and the plays. In other words (since life is short and I remembered virtually nothing of thousands of previous essays written in the "traditional" style that I had so dutifully called for), why not ask for responses that I actually would look forward to reading? Radical, right? And so I came up with the "letters" approach.
The students love these assignments because they can be so creative, and they can even be wrong-without-being-wrong. There is form, there is structure, and there is the logic of argument implicit in the "stance" described in each "letter" assignment. (And no one could ever hope to evade these by going to the Internet for responses, I assure you.) I know this approach has been used before, but the secret is to make the "letters" assignments genuinely your own by asking for responses that YOU want to hear. My students just love this somewhat whacky way of penetrating Shakespeare's complex world without their having to pretend to be "experts." It doesn't even seem like work to them, yet they pour twice as much effort into these assignments, with real enjoyment. We read some aloud in class, usually with a little dramatic flair and always with some appreciative applause. I call this win-win-win. And I believe this approach is as applicable to a History or Biology class as to an English class.
The students love these assignments because they can be so creative, and they can even be wrong-without-being-wrong. There is form, there is structure, and there is the logic of argument implicit in the "stance" described in each "letter" assignment. (And no one could ever hope to evade these by going to the Internet for responses, I assure you.) I know this approach has been used before, but the secret is to make the "letters" assignments genuinely your own by asking for responses that YOU want to hear. My students just love this somewhat whacky way of penetrating Shakespeare's complex world without their having to pretend to be "experts." It doesn't even seem like work to them, yet they pour twice as much effort into these assignments, with real enjoyment. We read some aloud in class, usually with a little dramatic flair and always with some appreciative applause. I call this win-win-win. And I believe this approach is as applicable to a History or Biology class as to an English class.
EXAMPLE ASSIGNMENT 1: As a character in Othello, you realize at some point in the play that, to avoid a tragic ending, what Othello needs most is an informative letter from you. Write that letter—and indicate when in the course of the play Othello needs to receive this letter in order to avoid a tragic end. (Try to write the letter “in character.”)
To read the full article click here:
Source: --John McDaniel, On Course Website
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
The Year Ahead in Higher Ed Technology
What happens when tough economic times combine with fatigue across the campus community hyping the latest “killer app,” and the growing intolerance of disruptions to services occasioned by security-related activities? I think the intersection of these three realities represent the most important challenges for campus information technology leaders in 2009.
We have not seen three years of negative economic growth since the birth of the Internet. We are one year into the global recession and the crystal-ball gazing under way on most campuses is not producing rosy scenarios. Chief information officers at most universities are closing in on “core” operations as they respond to cost cutting requirements after more than five years of marginal growth.
CIOs are portfolio managers. Like their counterparts, CIO portfolio management is really about meeting three goals: operating effectively, satisfying customers, and selectively engaging in innovation (R&D). In the sort of three-year downturn that most experts envision, tough decisions will be required to perform strongly in all three of those areas.
To read the full article click here:
Source: --Lev Gonick, Higher Ed Website
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Lessons of a Summer Teaching Online
It was September of my first year as assistant professor at a liberal arts university when I read the announcement about teaching a summer online class. Summer seemed a long way off and the idea of the extra money I could earn was enticing. (My new baby, new mortgage, and the ever-lamented low pay of assistant professors weighed heavily on my mind.) As an avid user of Blackboard, I felt more than well-prepared for the task of teaching online and I thought it would be fun to challenge my teaching skills by depending entirely on the Internet to communicate class material to my students. Additionally, I was delighted to be able to teach students a seminar in my specialty area, cognitive neuroscience of memory. My university offered extensive course development and online training, including an assigned instructional designer for the entire process, so I fearlessly signed on for the adventure.
As I faithfully attended the monthly training meetings for Just in Time Technology (ex: how to use Skype) and for Course Design (ex: what is the conversion of 14 weeks pacing into a 30 day class), it began to dawn on me that I had underestimated the time and preparation required for my online course. I was one of a handful of new faculty who had added summer teaching to their first year obligations. As we sat in our classes and were shown the innovations of the online veterans, I doubt I was the only one who was feeling overwhelmed with bells and whistles. The online teaching veterans had planned every detail from music clips to the customized picture that would be shown behind the course title when students logged in. I learned that there are more than three ways to present a syllabus electronically, that I should probably post a video introduction of myself, and that the bar for creativity is set very high when an origami project can be successfully taught online. I had confidently thought I knew a lot about technology but I admit I had never considered such intricacies as whether presenting exam questions one-at-a-time or all on one page resulted in better student performance and ensured protection against cheating. As a cognitive neuroscientist, I know quite a bit about learning and memory but my mind was boggled by pedagogical concepts like “visual arguments” and “muddiest points,” and by the practice of making “concept maps” out of course material. As the summer crept closer and closer, I started to think that I had made a tremendous mistake.
To read the full article click here:
Source: --Amy Overman, Higher EdWebsite
As I faithfully attended the monthly training meetings for Just in Time Technology (ex: how to use Skype) and for Course Design (ex: what is the conversion of 14 weeks pacing into a 30 day class), it began to dawn on me that I had underestimated the time and preparation required for my online course. I was one of a handful of new faculty who had added summer teaching to their first year obligations. As we sat in our classes and were shown the innovations of the online veterans, I doubt I was the only one who was feeling overwhelmed with bells and whistles. The online teaching veterans had planned every detail from music clips to the customized picture that would be shown behind the course title when students logged in. I learned that there are more than three ways to present a syllabus electronically, that I should probably post a video introduction of myself, and that the bar for creativity is set very high when an origami project can be successfully taught online. I had confidently thought I knew a lot about technology but I admit I had never considered such intricacies as whether presenting exam questions one-at-a-time or all on one page resulted in better student performance and ensured protection against cheating. As a cognitive neuroscientist, I know quite a bit about learning and memory but my mind was boggled by pedagogical concepts like “visual arguments” and “muddiest points,” and by the practice of making “concept maps” out of course material. As the summer crept closer and closer, I started to think that I had made a tremendous mistake.
To read the full article click here:
Source: --Amy Overman, Higher EdWebsite
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Fixing Higher Ed
The press and the blogosphere have devoted significant coverage recently to a report by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce that predicted that the United States is on "collision course with the future." The report estimated that within a mere eight years, the nation will suffer a shortfall of at least 3 million workers with college degrees and 4.7 million workers with postsecondary certificates. The authors of the report concluded that to meet the challenges of a global economy in which 59 to 63 percent of domestic jobs require education beyond the high-school level, America’s colleges and universities "need to increase the number of degrees they confer by 10 percent annually, a tall order."
Although numerous commentators have responded to the report by echoing its call for increased access to higher education, it seems to me that few have focused on a key term in the report’s call to "develop reforms that result in both cost-efficient and high quality postsecondary education." Producing millions more baccalaureate-educated workers will do nothing to address the competitiveness of the U.S. workforce if those degrees are not high quality ones. Sadly, it is pretty clear that far too many college degrees aren’t worth the paper on which they are printed.
Although numerous commentators have responded to the report by echoing its call for increased access to higher education, it seems to me that few have focused on a key term in the report’s call to "develop reforms that result in both cost-efficient and high quality postsecondary education." Producing millions more baccalaureate-educated workers will do nothing to address the competitiveness of the U.S. workforce if those degrees are not high quality ones. Sadly, it is pretty clear that far too many college degrees aren’t worth the paper on which they are printed.
In 2006, the Spellings Commission reported disturbing data that more than 60 percent of college graduates were not proficient in prose, document, and quantitative literacy. In other words, significantly more than half of college degree holders in the United States lack the “critical thinking, writing and problem-solving skills needed in today’s workplaces.”
To read the full article click here:
Source: -- Henry F. Fradella, Higher Ed Website
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)