1 / 55

by ETU/CW(DR)

by ETU/CW(DR). A Case Study on Learning Styles and Problem-Based learning of ITE Students. Agenda. Learning styles. Authentic PBL model. Case study settings. Observations. Feedback by students and staff. Pre and post surveys. Conclusion and recommendations.

donagh
Télécharger la présentation

by ETU/CW(DR)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. by ETU/CW(DR) A Case Study on Learning Styles and Problem-Based learning of ITE Students

  2. Agenda Learning styles Authentic PBL model Case study settings Observations Feedback by students and staff Pre and post surveys Conclusion and recommendations

  3. VARK learning Style(developed in 1987 by Neil Fleming, Lincoln University, New Zealand) David Kolb Experiential Learning Style Learning Styles Models used:

  4. The VARK learning Style uses the three main sensory receivers: - Vision - Auditory - Kinesthetic (movement) - Read/Write VARK Learning Styles

  5. VARK Learning Styles • It is a short, simple inventory that has been well-received because: • • its dimensions are intuitively understood and its applications are practical. • • it has helped people understand each other and especially students to learn more effectively and to become more sensitive to the diversity of teaching strategies necessary to reach all students.

  6. David Kolb on Experiential Learning Style (CE) concrete experience: being involved in a new experience (AE) active experimentation: using theories to solve problems, make decisions (RO) reflective observation: watching others or developing observations about own experience (AC) abstract conceptualization: creating theories to explain observations

  7. David Kolb Learning Styles Kolb Learning Styles The Accommodator is more of a risk-taker, relies on intuitive trial and error approaches to problem solving. The Diverger is particularly adapted to viewing a situation from multiple perspectives. The Assimilator is viewed as a thinker who specializes in inductive reasoning and the formulation of theories. The Converger relies on common sense, is better suited to the practical application of ideas.

  8. Problem Base Learning (PBL) PBL is an instructional approach that uses real-life ill-structured problems as the impetus for learning. Boud & Feletti 1997 The analysis of these problems results in acquisition of discipline knowledge and problem-solving skills. Uribe, Klein & Sulivan, 2003

  9. Teamwork Integrated Knowledge Real World Problem as Curriculum Teacher as Activator/Facilitator Student as Problem Solver Problem Solving Skills Self-Directed Learning Skills Traditional vs Authentic PBL Model APBL Traditional Teacher Content as Curriculum Student Source: Authentic Problem-Based Learning Wee Keng Neo, Lynda & Kek Yih Chyn, Megan page 17

  10. Designing the Problem ensure the achievement of the learning outcomes Skills Standards identify the causes of complaints customers’ questions and complaints are handled to achieve customer satisfaction. the appropriate verbal and non-verbal messages are identified “Service Recovery” action is determined

  11. Designing the Problem determine the availability of resources web resources books newspaper articles eTutor Digital Media Resource

  12. Designing the Problem craft the problem scenario be authentic/real world/language use should be short and simple. tap on the prior knowledge of the student put student in a particular role that they would likely to be working in.

  13. Context Module: Customer Service (EM21030) Topic: Handling Customers’ Complaint Duration: 4 hours

  14. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Student Groups Period of Pilot Run: 20 Feb 06 – 17 Mar 06 Period of Pilot Run: 22 Feb 06 – 17 Mar 06 Period of Pilot Run: 16 May 06 – 13 Jun 06 DE0407T (EC) 25 students AD0501I (DMD) 31 students Class OH (SS) 35 students D10407P&R (IT) 36 students AZ0501J (EE) 31 students Class OJ (SS) 31 students Staff: Ms Suryani LT/LFS/DR Staff: Ms Tay Hwee Lan LT/LFS/AMK Staff: Ms Joanna Seam LT/SS/CT Ms Lam Lee Lah LT/SS/CT Ms Siti Aminah LT/SS/CT

  15. PBL Pilot Run Materials Learners’ role: Customer Service Supervisor Problem: Customer complained about poor service Required: (a) to submit a proposal on how to improve the service standards in the department (b) devise a service recovery strategy for the company and (c) propose 3 service recovery strategies with strict instructions for the staff to follow.

  16. PBL Pilot Run Materials Click to view. Learner Package Click to view. Facilitator Package Click to view.

  17. Learner Package PBL Pilot Run Materials Click to view. Learner Package Click to view. Facilitator Package + Click to view.

  18. Observations Duration Attendance Punctuality Content Teamwork Group Presentation Solving the problem Final Presentation Room

  19. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Duration DE0407T (EC) AD0501I (DMD) Class OH (SS) D10407P&R (IT) AZ0501J (EE) Class OJ (SS) The 4 hrs topic was completed in 3 lessons of 1.5 hrs each. The 4 hrs topic was completed in 2 lessons of 2 hrs each. The 4 hrs topic was completed in 4 lessons of 2 hrs each. • Preparation for the final presentation not included. • Students were given some time to do their research. • Preparation for the final presentation not included. • Research time also not included. • Students were given time to do information search in class. • Preparation for the final presentation was included.

  20. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Attendance AD0501I ~ 75% (DMD) DE0407T ~ 80% (EC) Class OH ~77% (SS) D10407P&R ~ 86% (IT) AZ0501J ~ 74% (EE) Class OJ ~75% (SS)

  21. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Punctuality Needs improvement. Most of the students took their own time to come to lesson. Most of the time the facilitator had to call the students on their mobile to ask and remind them to attend lesson. Needs improvement. Most of the students took their own time to come to lesson. Students had to call their classmates to come to class quickly. Students tend to be late when it is the 1st hour lesson. Good. Students were usually on time for lessons.

  22. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Content Students had no problem understanding the problem statement and navigating the Students’ Package. Students had no problem understanding the problem statement and navigating the Students’ Package. Students had no problem understanding the problem statement and navigating the Students’ Package. In the reflection journal, students appreciate the use of the KND Chart which helped them focus their discussion.

  23. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Teamwork (1) DE0407T (EC) AD0501I (DMD) Class OH (SS) 4 groups of 5 1 group of 6 6 groups of 5 1 group of 3 5 groups of 5 D10407P&R (IT) AZ0501J (EE) Class OJ (SS) 4 groups of 5 2 groups of 6 1 group of 3 5 groups of 5 1 group of 6 4 groups of 5 3 group of 4

  24. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Business Nitec (SS) Teamwork (2) Group synergy: visible in some teams others lacking Group synergy: lacking in all teams Group synergy: visible in 2 groups but lacking in the rest of the teams Guidance: quite independent Guidance: needed lots of it from facilitator Guidance: needed lots of it from the facilitator Absenteeism: members not regular, group morale affected Absenteeism:members not regular, group morale affected Absenteeism: OK

  25. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Teamwork (3) Group conflict: none Group conflict: none Group conflict: none Sharing of knowledge: insufficient and group discussion was superficial Sharing of knowledge: insufficient and discussion was superficial Sharing of knowledge: insufficient and discussion was superficial Concentration: OK Concentration:low Concentration: low

  26. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Group presentation DE0407T (EC)All 5 teams did PowerPoint presentation AD0501I (DMD) 3 teams did PowerPoint presentation, 1 team did role play and 1 team did a PowerPoint presentation cum role play. Class OH (SS) All 7 teams did PowerPoint presentation D10407P&R (IT) All the 7 teams presented using PowerPoint. AZ0501J (EE) 3 teams did role play and 3 did PowerPoint presentation. 1 team has 1 member present. Class OJ (SS) All 7 teams did PowerPoint presentation

  27. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Solving the Problem DE0407T (EC)Of the 5 teams only 2 teams’ presentations were close to solving the problems. Class OH (SS) Of the 7 teams only 2 teams’ presentations were close to solving the problems. AD0501I (DMD) Of the 5 teams only 2 teams’ presentations were close to solving the problems. D10407P&R (IT) Of the 7 teams only 2 teams’ presentations were close to solving the problems AZ0501J (EE) Of the 6 team only 1 team’s presentation was close to solving the problem. Class OJ (SS) Of the 7 teams only 2 teams’ presentations were close to solving the problems.

  28. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Final Presentation • Generally students were listless and did not seem interested. • Reasons: • Final presentation was too detailed and long. • Students do not like the traditional method of lesson delivery. • Generally students were listless and did not seem interested. • Reasons: • Final presentation was too detailed and long. • Students do not like the traditional method of lesson delivery. • Generally students were listless and did not seem interested. • Reasons: • Final presentation was too detailed and long. • Students do not like the traditional method of lesson delivery.

  29. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Rooms Self Accessed Room Presentation was done in LT1 Smart Classrooms/IT labs Presentations were done in special rooms B6/202 and 203 Self Accessed Room Presentation was done in Life Skills Room 24-11

  30. Higher Nitec (IT & EC) Nitec (DMD & EE) Nitec (SS) Students’ Feedback DE0407T (EC) AD0501I (DMD) Class OH (SS) About 83% like lesson to be conducted using PBL About 70% like lesson to be conducted using PBL About 92% like lesson to be conducted using PBL D10407P&R (IT) AZ0501J (EE) Class OJ (SS) About 89% like lesson to be conducted using PBL About 61% like lesson to be conducted using PBL About 95% like lesson to be conducted using PBL

  31. Student Feedback Yes It is challenging and gives us the opportunity to get more information. Student DMD Yes, I do like the lesson. I understand much better. It is fun to know more ideas. Interact more with classmates. The best thing we have experience. I want it more!! student, Class OH

  32. Student Feedback “Yes! Team presentation will make us more confident in presenting in front of the crowd.” student, Class OJ “No I don’t like lesson to be conducted in this manner, because I like to do alone, doing in a team have many barriers, so it is better to do alone than in team, and I also don’t like to present in front of the whole class/crowd.” Irene, Class OJ

  33. Student Feedback “Yes. It makes us think out of the box, identify the problems and brainstorm all the possible solutions to the problem.” student, IT “It trains us to analyze problems, solve it step-by-step and research for appropriate information and lastly doing a team presentation builds teamwork and is required in any jobs outside in society to do a short report and analysis. ” student, EC I like to solve problem with my team mates student, EE

  34. Staff Feedback “I believe that our students would be receptive to PBL method of learning. However, they would require some lead time and perhaps some ‘ground work’ has to be done first to familiarize them with the processes involved in PBL.” Staff 1 “The Lecturer in PBL becomes a facilitator and must be prepared to ask open-ended questions, monitor progress, probe, encourage critical reflection, and make suggestions and help students to create a positive learning atmosphere. This requires a high level of interpersonal skills.” Staff 2

  35. Staff Feedback “There are always the initial teething problems. It should be workable as some students communicated that PBL makes them think and take ownership of their own learning.” Staff 3 “Yes. Should be able to work for our students. A little guidance and some help with the e-tutor to explain some basic concepts and then to indicate some web-links whereby students can do further research to find answers to their problem.. Staff 4

  36. Staff Feedback “It is a good opportunity for our students to do the selected topic "Handling Customers' Complaint as a PBL Lesson. It creates the opportunity for them to become self-directed learners.” Staff 5

  37. Evaluation is defined as a study designed and conducted to assist us to assess an object’s merit and worth (Stufflebeam, 2001). What is an Evaluation?

  38. What we want to know from this study? What is the learning style of our students? Does PBL help students to learn better? What are the students’ perception on learning by PBL method? Research Questions

  39. Conduct a pre survey on 6 classes undergoing PBL pilot run. - IT/DR, EC/DR, DMD/AMK, EE/AMK, SS/CTOH, SS/CTOJ Analysis - Consolidation of the pre-survey results Pre Survey Learning style of our students?

  40. Pre Survey Results Learning style of our students?

  41. Pre Survey Results Learning style of our students?

  42. Conduct a pre-test and post-test (MCQ) on students’ understanding of the lesson. Analysis - Consolidation of the test results Post Survey Does PBL help students to learn better?

  43. Comparing the test marks by students on the pre and post test results. Analysis – use statistical method (t-test) to scientifically prove the hypothesis. Post Survey Does PBL help students to learn better?

  44. Test the hypothesis: H0 : No sign. difference in pre and post test results H1 : There is sign. difference in pre and post test results SPSS (statistical software tool) to help in analysis Post Survey Results Does PBL help students to learn better?

  45. Post Survey Results Does PBL help students to learn better? • Result output shows that there is sign. difference in pre and post test results (by comparing the t-value obtained with the critical t-value)

  46. Conduct a survey on the students on 5 areas Analysis - Consolidation of the survey results Post Survey What are students perception on PBL?

  47. Post Survey Results (1)

  48. Post Survey Results (2)

  49. Post Survey Results (3)

  50. Post Survey Results (4)

More Related