Download
constructive alignment n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Constructive Alignment PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Constructive Alignment

Constructive Alignment

742 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Constructive Alignment

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Constructive Alignment DMLF'07 – Invited Talk Claus Brabrand, Ph.D. ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) Associate Professor, IT-University of Copenhagen Denmark

  2. Outline Warm up exercise: • Post-It focus exercise... Constructive Alignment: • The Theory of Constructive Alignment "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions (and possibly even answers...) 1 2 3 4 5

  3. T Warm up exercise • Post-It exercise: • Write down answer to: • "what is good teaching?" • 2) Swap Post-Its...

  4. Outline Warm up exercise: • "What is good teaching?" The Theory of Constructive Alignment: • FILM: "Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding" "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions (and possibly even answers...) 1 2 3 4 5

  5. Let's watch the short-film... Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding ))) ((( Inspired by: "Teaching for Quality Learning at University", John Biggs Available on DVD through Aarhus University Press: ((( http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ ))) Features Epilogue by John Biggs, DVD menu, and subtitles inEnglish, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German, and Danish

  6. Outline Warm up exercise: • "What is good teaching?" The Theory of Constructive Alignment: • FILM: "Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding" "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions (and possibly even answers...) 1 2 3 4 5

  7. From Content to Competence • (Concurrency 2004+2005) course aims: • Given in terms of a 'content description': • Essentially: • The goal is...: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... This is a bad idea for 2 reasons...!

  8. Problem with 'content' as aim • Problem with 'content'as learning objectives?! analyze ... theorize ... analyze systems explain causes circa-explain ... circa-describe ... • Objective: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... Stud. C agreement tacit knowledge from research-based tradition (not known by stud.)  name solutions recite conditons Teacher analyze systems explain causes Stud. B BUT, even if it were possible to agree, we know that the exam will dictate the learning anyways. Stud. A Censor

  9. Problem with 'understanding' • Problem with 'understanding'as learning objectives?! • Objective: • To understand: • deadlock • interference • synchronization • ... concept of deadlock ?!  The answer is simple: It cannot be measured (!)

  10. [ Competence := knowledge + capacity to act upon it ] 'Competence' as objectives ! • 'Competence' as learning objectives ! • Evaluation = Have the student do something, and then measure product and/or process • Objective ! • To learn to: • analyze systems for... • explain cause/effects... • prove properties of... • compare methods of... • ... Note:'understanding' is (of course)pre-requisitional (!)  Note': inherently operational (~ verbs) 'SOLO' = Structure of the ObservedLearning Outcome

  11. T Neighbour Discussion Discuss with neighbour: "does this make sense ?!?" (content  competence)

  12. [ Competence := knowledge + capacity to act upon it ] 'Competence' as objectives ! • 'Competence' as learning objectives ! • Evaluation = Have the student do something, and then measure product and/or process • Objective ! • To learn to: • analyze systems for... • explain cause/effects... • prove properties of... • compare methods of... • ... Note:'understanding' is (of course)pre-requisitional (!)  Note': inherently operational (~ verbs) 'SOLO' = Structure of the ObservedLearning Outcome

  13. SOLO 5  to generalize  to hypothesize to theorize  ... "extended abstract" to relate  to compare  to analyze  ... SOLO 4 "relational" to classify  to combine  to enumerate  ... SOLO 3 "multi-structural" to identify  to do procedure  to recite  ... SOLO 2 "uni-structural" no understanding  irrelevant information misses point  ... SOLO 1 "pre-structural" Advantages of 'SOLO' • Advantages of 'SOLO': • Constructed for research-based (university) teaching • Converges on research (at SOLO 5) • Strong correspondence to Piaget's learning stages • From cognitive psychology depth (qualitative levels) surface (quantitative levels)

  14. Graphic Illustration Legend immediately relevant aspects – given! related or hypothetical – not given! irrellevant or inappropriate student response x R x R' x R R'' x x R R1 R2 R R3 R X R SOLO (elaborated) • to theorize • to generalize • to hypothesize • to predict • to analyze • to relate • to compare • to explain causes • to describe • to combine • to classify • to perform algorithm • to do simple procedure • to define • to identify • to recite extended abstract SOLO 5 relational SOLO 4 multi structural SOLO 3 uni structural SOLO 2

  15. Note: the list is non-exhaustive SOLO (more verbs) SOLO 5 • to theorize • to hypothesize • to generalize • to critize • to predict • to applytheory (to 'distant' problems) • to put-into-perspective • to reflect • to judge • to discuss "extended abstract" SOLO 4 • to apply theory (to 'near' problems) • to reason about (reach conclusion) • to explain (cause-effect) • to explain (similarities-differences) • to explain (strengths-weaknesses) • to analyze • to argue • to relate • to compare • to integrate "relational" SOLO 2+3 • to enumerate • to paraphrase • to do simple procedure • to define • to identify / name • to recite • to describe • to structure • at collate • to combine • to classify • to perform algorithm "multi structural" & "uni structural"

  16. Concrete Example andConcrete Recommendations (4x) 1) Use 'standard formulation': put learning focus on student (Note: competence formulation "to be able to") Intended Learning Outcomes [Genetics 101] After the course, the students are expected to be able to: locate genes on chromosomes do simple calculations : (e.g., recombination frequencies, in-breeding coefficients, Hardy-Weinberg, evolutionary equilibria). describe and perform connexion-analysis describe fundamental genetic concepts: (e.g., mutation variation, in-breeding, natural selection). describe and analyze simple inheritancies analyze inheritance of multiple genes simultaneously 4)Avoid 'understanding-goals': "To understand X", "Be familiar with Y", "Have a notion of Z", ...! V N N V N V V V N V V N V 3) Use 'Verb + Noun' formulation: What the student is expected to dowith a given matter . 2) List sub-goals as 'bullets': Clearer than text N V

  17. T Post-It exercise Write down 1-2 key competences (i.e., verbs) (for your course) 5 4 2+3

  18. Outline Warm up exercise: • "What is good teaching?" The Theory of Constructive Alignment: • FILM: "Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding" "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions (and possibly even answers...) 1 2 3 4 5

  19. 5' Break Please put the Post-Its on the wall "What is good teaching?" Key competences (in your course)

  20. Outline Warm up exercise: • "What is good teaching?" The Theory of Constructive Alignment: • FILM: "Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding" "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions & answers ... 1 2 3 4 5

  21. Definition: “Good Teaching” • Definition: • Good news; we now know how to do this: "Good teaching is getting most students to use the higher cognitive level processes that the more academic students use spontaneously" -- “Teaching for Quality Learning at University”, John Biggs, 2003 Alignment:  Explicitly define:intended learning outcomes &  Exam measure intended learning outcomes Teaching form intended learning outcomes

  22. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) operationalization 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (intended learning outcomes)

  23. A Case-Study on ImplementingAlignment For more information about the implementation of alignment...: "Constructive Alignment for Teaching Model-Based Design for Concurrency" -- a case-study on implementing alignment Claus Brabrand In Proc. Workshop on Teaching Concurrency, June 2007, (aka., "TeaConc'07"), pp. 1--17 ((( Invited Paper for Invited Talk for TeaConc'07 ))) Available on my homepage: ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ )))

  24. "The Learning Pyramid" Average retention rate passive 5% Lecture 10% Reading activation level of engagement 20% Audiovisual 30% Demonstration 50% Discussion group 75% Practice by doing active student 80% Teaching others [Kilde: NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, Bethel, Maine]

  25. Tips'n'Tricks (activation) • Neighbour discussions: • Post-It exercise: • Form variation: properties: • anonymous (!) • swap'able • everyone will engage usages: • focus: warm up / zoom in • empathetic control • shared knowledge pool • more questions(students dare ask them) • better questions(students had a chance to discuss) [Phil Race] 1-2 min timeout • Frequent breaks: pulse reader measurements: lecturing blended with in-class activation exercises

  26. NEW OLD Tips'n'Tricks (cont'd) • Use many examples:(build on student pre-knowledge) • Explicit structure: • Student 'recap' at end: 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww 1. xxxxxxxxxx 2. yyyyyyyyyy 3. zzzzzzzzzz 4. wwwwwww  • self evident to you [ teacher ] • not to a learner [ student ] (esp. during learning process) • "Less-is-more": • analyze • compare • relate common deadlock, uncommon deadlock, A-synchronization, B-synchronization, hand-shake, multi-party synchronization, multi-party hand-shake, binary semaphores, generalized semaphores, blocking semaphores, recursive locks, ... vs. now after 1 day after 1 week after 2 weeks after 3 weeks Emphasize depth over breadth (coverage)

  27. Outline Warm up exercise: • "What is good teaching?" The Theory of Constructive Alignment: • FILM: "Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding" "From Theory to Practice": • 'From content to competence' Tips'n'Tricks: • Tips'n'Tricks for teaching Q'n'A: • Questions (and possibly even answers...) 1 2 3 4 5

  28. x R x R’ R’’ . . . Questions... My research and teaching Cognition & structures Intended learning outcomes (ILO) Association new ~ old "understanding" content  competence The SOLO Taxonomy 'TLA' Teaching/Learning Activities Teacher models levels 1 - 2 - 3 Student models Susan & Robert M S The Short-Film I 'The Book' Model-based design for Concurrency Experiences Pre vs. Post Student activation Satisfaction analyze explain Students at Uni ? "What is good teaching?" Exam Tips'n'Tricks Constructive Alignment John Biggs

  29. Now, please: "3-minute recap" • Please spend 3' on thinking about and writing down the most important points from the talk – now!: Immediately After 1 day After 1 week After 2 weeks After 3 weeks

  30. Thank You! Film homepage: ((( http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ )))

  31. BONUS SLIDES

  32. Background (~ this talk) • Concurrency 2004+2005: • "Pre-alignment" • Learned about teaching/learning theories • In particular: Constructive Alignment,The SOLO Taxonomy, Constructivism, ... • Concurrency 2006+2007: • "Post-alignment"

  33. Disclaimer The point of this part is: • not to exhibit aperfectly aligned course; • but to show how the principles of alignment can be put to use (in particular, how it may serve as guidelines for the exam and TLA). [ TLA :=Teaching/Learning Activities ]

  34. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  35. Starting Point • Content description (Concurrency '04+'05): What is the overall goal of the course...? (what are the students to learn)

  36. Overall Course Philosophy • Model-Based Designfor Concurrency:

  37. Thoroughly Motivate (what can they do, if they 'bother' learning this?)

  38. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  39. #2 #1 . #3 . S M . I Model-based design for Concurrency T Intended Learning Outcomes • Intended Learning Outcomes(based on The SOLO Taxonomy): Note:explicitly included as a non-goal  #1 #2 #3

  40. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  41. On Aligning the Exam (~ ILOs) • Pre-alignment (Concurrency 2004+2005): • Group Project (50%) • Individual Multiple-Choice Test (50%) • Post-alignment (Concurrency 2006+2007): • Group Project (50%) • Individual Multiple-Choice Test (50%) 'Inherited' from pre-2004: Because it seemed like a good idea to do a project Added in 2005: Politically motivated: exam must have individual part!  However; BIG differences...! Coincidentally: Carefully designed (~ILOs): Project good for evaluating model-based design process Carefully designed (~ILOs): MC-test good for evaluating analytical skills (~problem): to analyze/compare models

  42. Project (pre- vs. post-alignment) • 2004 Project: "The Beer Factory": • 2006 Project:"The Banana Republic": • No explicit learning objectives (only 'list of contents') • No explicit project grading criteria  result • Some student projects with no appearantmodel  impl. relationship (at least, to me)! 

  43. The Banana Republic Project designed(~ ILO's): • (a) Construct unsafe model (w/o controller); • (b) Test model - observe that collisions with 'El Presidente' can occur; • (c) Define safety property NO_CRASH; • (d) Verify that collisions can occur; • (e) Construct a controller (such that collisions can no longer occur); • (f) Verify that collisions can no longer occur; • (g) Define liveness property ('El Presidente' can eventually leave); • (h) Implement model in Java. • Grading (of the report): • constructmodels... • apply common solutions... • relate specmodel... • test model... • define properties... • verify model wrt. properties... • implement model... • relate modelimpl... • All ILO's except: • analyze models • comparemodels Better evaluated on MC-test

  44. MC-test (pre- vs. post-alignment) • 2004 MC-test: • 2006 Project: (a bunch of seemingly reasonable questions): Bad Alignment  Carefully designed (~ ILO's): • analyze models (and programs) wrt. behavior • compare models (and program) wrt. behavior

  45. Example: analyzemodels Good Alignment

  46. Example: compare models Good Alignment

  47. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)

  48. On Aligning the TLA (~ ILOs) • Pre-alignment (Concurrency 2004+2005): • Lectures (2-3 hrs/week) • 'Theoretical Exercise Classes' (2 hrs/week) • 'Programming Lab' (2 hrs/week) • Post-alignment (Concurrency 2006+2007): • Lectures (2-3 hrs/week) with activation exercises • 'Theoretical Exercise Classes' (2h/w) apply common solutions • 'Programming Lab' (2 hrs/week) hands-on training for project • Weekly hand-ins (every week) train for project (w/ feedback!) • MC-test sample questions (given early) train for MC-test essentially teacher-centric "monologues" [ Idea due to colleague Thomas Hildebrandt at ITU ]  student-centric

  49. TLA's (post-alignment) Student-centric: • 'Theoretical Exercise Classes' (2h/w) apply common solutions • 'Programming Lab' (2 hrs/week) hands-on training for project • Weekly hand-ins (every week) train for project (w/ feedback!) • MC-test sample questions (given early) train for MC-test Teacher-centric: • Lectures (2-3 hrs/week) with activation exercises { apply common solutions } { construct, implement, test, verify, define, apply } { construct, implement, relate } { analyze, compare } introduce fundamental concepts/problems/solutions (in terms of models & impl)

  50. Implementation Process • Process(course specific): ? 1) Think carefully about: overall goal of course (what are the stud. to learn?) 2)Operationalize these goals: and express them as intended learning outcomes alignment 3)Choosecarefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes) 4)Choosecarefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes)