1. Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Constructive Alignment for Teaching Computer Science Claus Brabrand ((( brabrand@itu.dk ))) ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/ ))) Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen Denmark Koli’2007 – Keynote

2. [ 2 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

3. [ 3 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 First: exercise Before we start: Post-It exercise: T 1) Write down answer to: "what is good teaching?" 2) Swap Post-Its...

4. [ 4 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Background (~ this talk) Concurrency 2004+2005: "Pre-alignment" Exposure to teaching/learning theories: “Constructive Alignment” “The SOLO Taxonomy” Concurrency 2006+2007: "Post-alignment"

5. [ 5 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

6. [ 6 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Let's watch the short-film... Teaching & Understanding Teaching & Understanding ((( ))) Available on DVD through Aarhus University Press:Aarhus University Press ((( http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ )))http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ Features Epilogue by John Biggs, DVD menu, and subtitles in English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German, and Danish Won “The Golden Ratio 2006” Award for “Best Educational Video” (~4000 DVDs sold) Inspired by: "Teaching for Quality Learning at University", John Biggs

7. [ 7 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

8. [ 8 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 From Content to Competence The “pre-alignment” Concurrency course aims: Given in terms of a 'content description': Essentially: This is a bad idea for 2 reasons...! The goal is...: To understand: deadlock interference synchronization...

9. [ 9 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Problem with 'content' as aim What is the problem with 'content' as learning objectives ?!? Objective: To understand: deadlock interference synchronization... analyze... theorize... explain deadlock describe... name solutions recite conditons Stud. C Stud. A Stud. B analyze systems explain causes Censor Teacher BUT, even if it were possible to agree, we know that the exam will dictate the learning anyways.  agreement analyze systems explain causes tacit knowledge from research-based tradition (not known by stud.)

10. [ 10 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Problem with 'understanding' Why not use 'understanding' as learning objectives ?!? The answer is simple : concept of deadlock ?!  Objective: To understand: deadlock interference synchronization... It cannot be measured (!)

11. [ 11 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 'Competence' as objectives ! 'Competence' as learning objectives ! Evaluation = Have the student do something, and then measure product and/or process 'SOLO' = Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome Note': inherently operational (~ verbs) Objective ! To learn to: analyze systems for... explain cause/effects... prove properties of... compare methods of...... Note: 'understanding' is (of course) pre-requisitional (!) [ Competence := knowledge + capacity to act upon it ]

12. [ 12 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Neighbour Discussion Discuss with neighbour: "does this make sense ?!?" (content  competence) T

13. [ 13 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Advantages of 'SOLO' Advantages of 'SOLO': Constructed for research-based (university) teaching Converges on research (at SOLO 5) S OLO 1  no understanding  irrelevant information  misses point ... S OLO 2 S OLO 3 S OLO 4 S OLO 5 "pre-structural"  to identify  to do procedure  to recite ... "uni-structural"  to classify  to combine  to enumerate ... "multi-structural"  to relate  to compare  to analyze ... "relational"  to generalize  to hypothesize  to theorize ... "extended abstract" depth (qualitative levels) surface (quantitative levels)

14. [ 14 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 SOLO (elaborated) Note: the list is non-exhaustive R SOLO 2 ”uni-structural” SOLO 3 “multi-structural” SOLO 4 “relational” SOLO 5 “extended abstract” R R2R2 R3R3 R1R1 R x x R x R' R'' x theorize generalize hypothesize predict judge reflect transfer theory (to new domain) … analyze compare contrast integrate relate explain causes apply theory (to its domain) … combine structure describe classify enumerate list do algorithm apply method … define identify count name recite paraphrase follow (simple) instructions … Graphic Legend immediately relevant aspects – given! related or hypothetical – not given! irrellevant or inappropriate student response x R QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE

15. [ 15 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Concrete Example and Concrete Recommendations (4x) 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 2) List sub-goals as 'bullets': Clearer than text 1) Use 'standard formulation': a) puts learning focus on the student b) competence formulation: "to be able to" 3) Use 'Verb + Noun' formulation: What the student is expected to do with a given matter. V N V V VV V V V V N N N N 4) Avoid 'understanding-goals': "To understand X", "Be familiar with Y", "Have a notion of Z",...! N

16. [ 16 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Post-It exercise Write down 1-2 key competences (i.e., verbs) (for your course) T Concurrency: analyze for deadlock compare models Concurrency: analyze for deadlock compare models

17. [ 17 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

18. Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 10' Break Please put the Post-Its on the wall "What is good teaching?" Key competences (in your course)

19. [ 19 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

20. [ 20 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Disclaimer  not to exhibit a perfectly aligned course;  but to show how the principles of alignment can be put to use (esp. how ILO’s may serve as guidelines for exam and teaching form). The point of this part is:

21. [ 21 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes ) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes ) alignment learning incentivelearning support

22. [ 22 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Starting Point Content description (Concurrency '04+'05): What is the overall goal of the course...? (what are the students to learn)

23. [ 23 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Overall Course Philosophy Model-Based Design for Concurrency:

24. [ 24 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes ) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes ) alignment

25. [ 25 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Intended Learning Outcomes Model-based design for Concurrency... SM I #1 #2 #3 Intended Learning Outcomes (based on The SOLO Taxonomy): Note: explicitly included as a non-goal  T

26. [ 26 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes ) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes ) alignment learning incentive

27. [ 27 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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%) However; BIG differences...!  Coincidentally: 'Inherited' from pre-2004: Because it seemed like a good idea to do a project Carefully designed (~ILOs): Project good for evaluating model-based design process Added in 2005: Politically motivated: exam must have individual part! Carefully designed (~ILOs): MC-test good for evaluating analytical skills (~problem): to analyze/compare models

28. [ 28 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Project (pre- vs. post-alignment) 2004 Project: "The Beer Factory": 2006 Project: "The Banana Republic":   Some student projects with no appearant model  impl. relationship (at least, to me)!  No explicit learning objectives (only 'list of contents')  No explicit project grading criteria  result

29. [ 29 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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):  construct models...  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  compare models Better evaluated on MC-test

30. [ 30 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 2004 MC-test: 2006 Project: MC-test (pre- vs. post-alignment)  analyze models (and programs) wrt. behavior (a bunch of seemingly reasonable questions): Carefully designed (~ ILO's):  Bad Alignment  compare models (and program) wrt. behavior

31. [ 31 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Example: analyze models Good Alignment

32. [ 32 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Example: compare models Good Alignment

33. [ 33 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes ) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes ) alignment learning support

34. [ 34 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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  [ Idea due to colleague Thomas Hildebrandt at ITU ] essentially teacher-centric "monologues" student-centric [ TLA := Teaching/Learning Activities ]

35. [ 35 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 TLA's (~ ILOs) Student-centric: 'Th. Ex. 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)  construct models…  apply common solutions...  relate spec  model...  test model...  define properties...  verify model wrt. properties...  analyze models…  compare models…  implement model...  relate model  impl... Intended learning outcomes

36. [ 36 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 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 3) Choose carefully the form(s) of examination (~ intended learning outcomes ) 4) Choose carefully the form(s) of teaching (~ intended learning outcomes ) alignment ? ?

37. [ 37 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Conclusions (pre vs. post) Subjectively: Constructive Alignment (!!!): To the point that I bothered making a film about it :) Own behavior changed: From 'intuition' to conscious choices; awareness of alternatives and of consequences of choices (~ student learning) My students' behavior changed (from my perspective): More focusses on learning the objectives (esp. 'to relate')  Student background and prerequisites;  The "Susan/Robert ratio";  Teacher's experience gain; Disclaimer: (many factors involved that vary from-year-to-year)......and many more

38. [ 38 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Objectively (I/III): (Questionnaire at end, 7-step scale) Student satisfaction: "slightly more satisfied"..or "constructive alignment doesn't compromize student satisfaction" Student proficiency: More useful figures (~learning) ! However: I only have post-alignment data :( Thus: "inconclusive" :( self-reported Pre ('04-'05) Post ('06-'07) Pre ('04+'05) Post ('06+'07)

39. [ 39 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Objectively (II/III): (Competences explicitly tested & trained) Competences (tested and trained for): Conclusion: "Substantial SOLO-level increase" (~ good teaching) ! Much better projects (esp. 'model  impl' relationship) !

40. [ 40 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Objectively (III/III): (Qualitative data from 2006 eval) Anonymous student in 2006 evaluation: “This course has been awesome! It took me a while to be able to think in models, but I saw the light along the way.” “Lectures have been great, the theoretical exercise classes have been rewarding and the feedback has been immense and insightful” “I did not have a lot of time to do the exercises, but they seemed relevant from week to week.” “The mini project was a good and solid exercise in analyzing a problem, making a model and implementing it. A very good exercise!” Overall: Teaching: Exercises: Project:

41. [ 41 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

42. [ 42 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 The New Danish Grade Scale ECTS SCALE A, B, C, D, E, Fx, F... 4 steps 8 steps 10 steps 21 steps... 4 steps 8 steps 10 steps 21 steps 7 steps:... Conversion (between EU countries): Problems (comparability ~ EU nations): Information loss (10 steps  7 steps): (13,11)  A; (9,8)  C; … The “13” (“exception grade”); doesn’t exist in other scales! Some places only access if you have top grade (~ 13) …and a number of other motivations pigeon hole principle

43. [ 43 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 “The Danish 7 Step Scale” Unacceptable -3 For a performance which is unacceptable in all respects F Inadequate 00 For an insufficient performance which does not meet the course objectives Fx Adequate 02 For a sufficient performance which barely meets the course objectives E Fair 4 For a fair performance which adequately meets the course objectives but also displays several major weaknesses D Good 7 For a good performance which meets the course objectives but also displays some weaknesses C Very good 10 For a very good performance which meets the course objectives, with only minor weaknesses B Excellent 12 For an excellent performance which completely meets the course objectives, with no or only a few insignificant weaknesses. A Grade := Degree of realization of course objectives!

44. [ 44 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Intended Learning Outcomes Consequence: Every course has to explicitly define…: Intended Learning Outcomes (!):)

45. [ 45 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Collect data... Systematically collect data (i.e. competences) Quantifiable via The SOLO Taxonomy: Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU) (  1000 courses!)

46. [ 46 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Analysis: ”Nature of Subjects” Analyzing for diff.’s in ”nature of subjects”: i.e., CS vs. Math vs. Physics vs. Biology vs. Chemistry vs. Geology vs. Statistics vs. …) Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU) * *) Tool used for entering ILO’s

47. [ 47 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Analysis: ”Progression” Analyzing for ”progression”: i.e., ”undergraduate” vs. ”graduate” courses Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU) *

48. [ 48 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Top 15 Competences Top 15 Competences: Computer Science (at Aarhus University): Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU) *

49. [ 49 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Danish Universities (~ Computer Science) (excl. AAU/Aalborg, DTU/Copenhagen, RUC/Roskilde): (Note: much more systematic impl. process undertaken at IMADA/SDU and DAIMI/AU.) Statistics: Computer Science (DK) Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU) *

50. [ 50 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 E.g. course: ”Databases” (at RUC/Roskilde): Note: almost entirely non-operational(!) i.e. measure how?!  obtain knowledge about the structure of database systems;  be familiar with design of databases by use of special notations like E/R and analysis through normalization;  get an overview of the most important database models and a detailed knowledge about the most important model - the relational model as well as the language SQL;  get an overview of database indexing and query processing;  obtain knowledge about application programming for DB systems. …and Identify Potential Problems Familiar with ?! Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU)

51. [ 51 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Assumptions  Objectives: intended  formulated  achieved [correlation] (i.e. we “analyze” formulated, but “reason about” achieved)  Goals in a course have equal weight [approximation]  Competences in a goal have equal weight [approximation]  SOLO is appropriate measure [Biggs’ studies]  Context independence of SOLO mapping [approximation]  Courses comparable via their SOLO levels [approximation] (e.g. “  avg ” partial order – average SOLO level) (e.g. “qual/quan” ratio – percentage of qualitative goals)  Progression manifests itself as competences (~ SOLO) [assumption] (some progression may also be in “the content part”) Many “assumptions” Analysis conclusions rest on…: Note: Work in progress (with Bettina Dahl Søndergaard, STENO/AU)

52. [ 52 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 utline 1 Introduction:  Background, Motivation, and Expectations 2 3 4 5 6 --- short (10’) break --- The Theory of Constructive Alignment:  FILM: “Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” From Theory to Practice:  “From content to competence” Implementing Alignment (case study):  Implementing alignment in Teaching Computer Science Computer Science Analysis:  Preliminary Analysis of DK experiences (~new grade scale) Open discussion:  Q’n’A / open debate / discussion, … O

53. [ 53 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Open Discussion... "What is good teaching?" R’ x R R’’ x The Short-Film Cognition structures The SOLO Taxonomy Association new ~ old analyze explain 'The Book' John Biggs "understanding" content  competence Student activation Student models Susan & Robert Teacher models levels 1 - 2 - 3 Intended learning outcomes (ILO) Constructive Alignment Exam Satisfaction Experiences Pre vs. Post Students at Uni Model-based design for Concurrency... My research and teaching 'TLA' Teaching/Learning Activities Tips'n'Tricks ??? S M I ? SOLO Analyses

54. [ 54 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Tips'n'Tricks (activation) Neighbour discussions: Frequent breaks: Post-It exercise:  focus: zoom in  anonymous (!)  swap'able  everyone will engage  empathetic control  shared knowledge pool pulse reader measurements:  more questions (students dare ask them)  better questions (students had a chance to discuss) 1-2 min timeout [Phil Race] Form variation: lecturing blended with in-class activation exercises

55. [ 55 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Tips'n'Tricks (cont'd) "Less-is-more": Use many examples: (build on student pre-knowledge) Explicit structure:  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. Emphasize depth over breadth (coverage) NEW OLD 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)  Student 'recap' at end: after 1 day after 1 week after 3 weeks after 2 weeks now

56. [ 56 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Now, please: "3-minute recap" Please spend 3' on thinking about and writing down the most important points from the talk – now!: After 1 day After 1 week After 3 weeks After 2 weeks Immediately

57. [ 57 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Key References ”Teaching for Quality Learning at University (what the student does) ” John Biggs The Society for Higher Education and Open University Press, 2003 ((( Note: 3rd edition available soon ))) ”Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy” John B. Biggs & Kevin F. Collis New York: Academic Press, 1982 ”Teaching Teaching & Understanding Understanding” Claus Brabrand & Jacob Andersen 19 minute award-winning short-film (DVD) Aarhus University Press, Faculty of Science, University of Aarhus, Denmark ”Constructive Alignment for Teaching Model-Based Design for Concurrency (a case-study on implementing alignment) ” Claus Brabrand Proc. Workshop on Teaching Concurrency (TeaConc’07) Siedlce, Poland, June 25, 2007 ((( http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/teaconc.pdf ))) http://www.itu.dk/people/brabrand/teaconc.pdf

58. [ 58 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 R x R' R'' x Model-based design for Concurrency... SM I #1 #2 #3

59. Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Thank You! ((( http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ )))http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/ Film's homepage:

60. Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 BONUS SLIDES

61. [ 61 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 The Role of the Exam Alignment: A theory of planning (over the course of a course) A theory of motivation (and incentive) The exam as a...: "Necessary evil" Motivational and learning-guiding pedagogical tool for the teacher(!) application of alignment "The exam does not come after, but before the course!"

62. [ 62 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Motivation Beyond the Exam Motivational problem: “Why bother learn the course material?”: Tell them why it is important to learn these things: How could these skills benefit them in their work/life/… (focus on advantages) [ Example… ]

63. [ 63 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Program world Model world Concrete Abstract P M abstraction concretization Programs and Models

64. [ 64 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 On Program Equivalence Program world Model world Concrete Abstract ~ P P’ M M’ 1. P ~ P’ ? 2. abstract 3. M ~ M’ ? 4. relate 5. M ~ M’ ! 6. concretize 7. P ~ P’ ! What discerns a really good programmer from one that is not so good is the capability of moving (consciously or unconsciously) between the concrete world of programs and the abstract world of models (via abstraction and concretization). Specifically, such a programmer is capable of (consciously or unconsciously): - 1) abstracting programs into models - 2) reasoning about the models - 3) concretizing the insights back into the world of programs

65. [ 65 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 On Property Satisfaction What discerns a really good programmer from one that is not so good is the capability of moving (consciously or unconsciously) between the concrete world of programs and the abstract world of models (via abstraction and concretization). Specifically, such a programmer is capable of (consciously or unconsciously): - 1) abstracting programs into models - 2) reasoning about the models - 3) concretizing the insights back into the world of programs

66. [ 66 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Notes on Skill Acquisition From the world of psychoanalysis: Skill acquisition progresses according to the following stages of learning: 1. Unconscious incompetence 2. Conscious incompetence 3. Conscious competence 4. Unconscious competence 5. Capacity for moving consciously between stages 3. and 4.: [ required by a teacher ]

67. [ 67 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 A taxonomy / language for teaching impersonalizes teaching Emotional detachment (aka. “dissociation”) The teacher is good/bad identity: good/bad teacher The methods are good/bad behavior: good/bad method knowledge: good/bad method With dissociation: more capable of dealing with critique  better to listen to constructive advice (…just like with our research) Impersonalization identity moral knowledge behavior “Neutological levels” [model of the mind, “NLP”] ethics experience reactions convictions capabilities interaction

68. [ 68 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Based on John Biggs' Theories 2nd edition (3rd edition expected this fall) "Teaching for Quality Learning at University", John Biggs

69. [ 69 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Teacher’s intention Student’s activity Exam’s assessment  e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply e.g. - memorize - describe U NALIGNED C OURSE e.g. - memorize - describe "Dealing with the test"

70. [ 70 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Teacher’s intention Student’s activity Exam’s assessment e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply A LIGNED C OURSE e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply e.g. - explain - relate - prove - apply

71. [ 71 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Definition: “Good Teaching” Definition: Good news: We now know how to do this: Alignment!!! Explicitly defined course objectives (as verbs)! Discourage surface-learning! Encourage depth-learning! “Less-is-more”: depth rather than breadth of coverage! ”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

72. [ 72 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 Thoroughly Motivate (what can they do, if they 'bother' learning this?)

73. [ 73 ] Claus Brabrand Koli’2007 – KeynoteNovember 16, 2007 The BLOOM Taxonomy (1956) The BLOOM Taxonomy: Knowledge Comprehension Application AnalysisEvaluationSynthesis Qualitative Quantitative SOLO 4+5 SOLO 2+3 ”[…] really intended to guide the selection of items for a test rather than to evaluate the quality of a student’s response to a particular item” -- (Biggs & Collis, 1982) ”