1. Facilitating Learning in Large Lecture Classes
Karl A. Smith
Engineering Education – Purdue University
Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota -
Michigan State University
College of Natural Science Workshop
September 2009

2. Workshop Layout Welcome & Overview
Integrated Course Design (CAP Model)
Content
Assessment
Pedagogy
Active & Cooperative Learning
Informal – Bookends on a Class Session
Formal Cooperative Learning
Design and Teamwork Features
Wrap-up and Next Steps 2

3. Workshop Objectives Participants will be able to
Explain rationale for Active and Cooperative Learning in Large Classes
Describe key features of Cooperative Learning
Apply cooperative learning to classroom practice
Describe key features of the Backward Design process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment - Pedagogy
Identify connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs

4. Background Knowledge Survey
Familiarity with
Approaches to Course Design
Wiggins & McTighe – Understanding by Design (Backward Design)
Fink – Creating Significant Learning Experiences
Felder & Brent – Effective Course Design
Active and Cooperative Learning Strategies
Informal – turn-to-your-neighbor
Formal – cooperative problem-based learning
Research
Student engagement – NSSE
Cooperative learning
How People Learn
Responsibility
Individual course
Program
Accreditation
Other

5. Backward Design Wiggins & McTighe
Stage 1. Identify Desired Results
Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence
Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences
and Instruction
Wiggins, Grant and McTighe, Jay Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

6. CAP Design Process Flowchart
Integrated Course Design (Fink, 2003)
1. Situational Factors
2. Learning Goals
3. Feedback and Assessment
4. Teaching/Learning Activities
5. Integration
Initial Design Phase
Context
Content
Assessment
Pedagogy
C & A & P
Alignment?
End
Start
Yes No
Backward Design 6

7. CAP Design Process (Shawn’s Model)
Start
Context
Content
Cloud of
alignment
Assessment
Pedagogy
End 7

8. Effective Course Design
(Felder & Brent, 1999)
ABET EC 2000
Bloom’s
Taxonomy
Course-specific
goals & objectives
Goals and
Objectives
Classroom
assessment
techniques
Technology
Cooperative
learning
Students
Instruction
Assessment
Other
experiences
Tests
Other measures
Lectures
Labs 8

9. Resources Integrated Design Approach
Pellegrino – Rethinking and Redesigning Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Backward Design Process (Wiggins & McTighe):
Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bransford, Vye and Bateman – Creating High Quality Learning Environments

10. Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology – National Science Foundation, 1996
Goal – All students have access to supportive, excellent undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology, and all students learn these subjects by direct experience with the methods and processes of inquiry.
Recommend that SME&T faculty: Believe and affirm that every student can learn, and model good practices that increase learning; starting with the student=s experience, but have high expectations within a supportive climate; and build inquiry, a sense of wonder and the excitement of discovery, plus communication and teamwork, critical thinking, and life-long learning skills into learning experiences. 10

11. 8:30-9:30?Take copies of Active Lrn, HTMI, New Paradigms,
Lila M. Smith

12. Pedago-pathologies Amnesia Fantasia Inertia
Lee Shulman – MSU Med School – PBL Approach (late 60s – early 70s); Stanford University, Past President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of College Teaching
Shulman, Lee S Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4),
8:30-9:30?Take copies of Active Lrn, HTMI, New Paradigms,

13. What do we do about these pathologies? – Lee Shulman
Activity
Reflection
Collaboration
Passion
Shulman, Lee S Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4), 13

14. 8:30-9:30?Take copies of Active Lrn, HTMI, New Paradigms,
Lila M. Smith

15. It could well be that faculty members of the twenty-first century college or university will find it necessary to set aside their roles as teachers and instead become designers of learning experiences, processes, and environments.
James Duderstadt, 1999 [Nuclear Engineering Professor; Dean, Provost and President of the University of Michigan] 15

16. Pedagogies of Engagement
(yeah! The red arrow is pointing at one of our undergrad researchers—Michelle Valeriano) 16

17. MIT & Harvard – Engaged Pedagogy
January 13, 2009—New York Times
January 2, 2009—Science, Vol. 323
Calls for evidence-based teaching practices

20. Cooperative Learning
•Positive Interdependence
•Individual and Group Accountability
•Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction
•Teamwork Skills
•Group Processing

21. Cooperative Learning Research Support
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30 (4),
• Over 300 Experimental Studies
• First study conducted in 1924
• High Generalizability
• Multiple Outcomes
Outcomes
1. Achievement and retention
2. Critical thinking and higher-level
reasoning
3. Differentiated views of others
4. Accurate understanding of others' perspectives
5. Liking for classmates and teacher
6. Liking for subject areas
7. Teamwork skills
Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www)
One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"
January 2005
March 2007

22. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom
Informal Cooperative Learning Groups
Formal Cooperative Learning Groups
Cooperative Base Groups
See Cooperative Learning
Handout (CL College-804.doc) 22

23. •Positive Interdependence •Individual and Group Accountability
Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome).
Key Concepts
•Positive Interdependence
•Individual and Group Accountability
•Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction
•Teamwork Skills
•Group Processing
Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www)
One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"

24. Individual & Group Accountability? 24

25. 25

26. Book Ends on a Class Session26

27. Advance Organizer
“The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him
David Ausubel - Educational psychology: A cognitive approach, 1968. 27

28. Book Ends on a Class Session
Advance Organizer
Formulate-Share-Listen-Create (Turn-to-your-neighbor) -- repeated every minutes
Session Summary (Minute Paper)
What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during this session?
What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session?
What was the “muddiest” point in this session?
Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www)
One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"

29. Advance Organizer
“The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.”
David Ausubel - Educational psychology: A cognitive approach, 1968. 29

30. Quick Thinks Reorder the steps Paraphrase the idea Correct the error
Support a statement
Select the response
Johnston, S. & Cooper,J Quick thinks: Active- thinking in lecture classes and televised instruction. Cooperative learning and college teaching, 8(1), 2-7. 30

31. FOCUS QUESTION Formulate-Share-Listen-Create
Informal Cooperative Learning Group
Introductory Pair Discussion of a
FOCUS QUESTION
Formulate your response to the question individually
Share your answer with a partner
Listen carefully to your partner's answer
Work together to Create a new answer through discussion 31

32. Minute Paper
What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during this session?
What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session?
What was the “muddiest” point in this session?
Give an example or application
Explain in your own words . . .
Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 32

33. Reflect on the session:
Session Summary
(Minute Paper)
Reflect on the session:
1. Most interesting, valuable, useful thing you learned.
2. Things that helped you learn.
3. Question, comments, suggestions.
Pace: Too slow Too fast
Relevance: Little Lots
Instructional Format: Ugh Ah 33

34. Q4 – Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (3.3)
MOT 8221 – Spring 2009 – Session 1
Q4 – Pace: Too slow Too fast (3.3)
Q5 – Relevance: Little Lots (4.2)
Q6 – Format: Ugh Ah (4.4) 34

35. Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with Concept Tests
Physics
Peer Instruction - Eric Mazur - Harvard –
Richard Hake –
Chemistry
Chemistry ConcepTests - UW Madison
Video: Making Lectures Interactive with ConcepTests
ModularChem Consortium –
STEMTEC
Video: How Change Happens: Breaking the “Teach as You Were Taught” Cycle – Films for the Humanities & Sciences –
Harvard
Thinking Together, From Questions to Concepts Interactive Teaching in Physics & Interactive Teaching DVD: Promoting Better Learning Using Peer Instruction and Just-In-Time Teaching: Derek Bok Center 35

36. The “Hake” Plot of FCI 35.00 SDI UMn-CL+PS 30.00 ALS WP 25.00X
UMn-CL+PS
30.00
ALS WP
25.00 X
UMn Cooperative Groups
20.00
PI(HU)
15.00
UMn Traditional
ASU(nc)
WP*
10.00
ASU(c) HU
5.00
0.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00 36
Pretest (Percent)

37. <g> = Concept Inventory Gain/Total
Richard Hake (Interactive engagement vs traditional methods)
Traditional (lecture)
Interactive (active/cooperative)
Barr & Tagg's From teaching to learing is the most often requested article from Change mangazine
Bill Camplbell and I started working on New Paradigms in 1993.
<g> = Concept Inventory Gain/Total

38. 38

39. Physics (Mechanics) Concepts: The Force Concept Inventory (FCI)
A 30 item multiple choice test to probe student's understanding of basic concepts in mechanics.
The choice of topics is based on careful thought about what the fundamental issues and concepts are in Newtonian dynamics.
Uses common speech rather than cueing specific physics principles.
The distractors (wrong answers) are based on students' common inferences. 39

40. Can be short term and ad hoc May be used to break up a long lecture
Informal Cooperative
Learning Groups
Can be used at any time
Can be short term and ad hoc
May be used to break up a long lecture
Provides an opportunity for students to process material they have been listening to (Cognitive Rehearsal)
Are especially effective in large lectures
Include "book ends" procedure
Are not as effective as Formal Cooperative Learning or Cooperative Base Groups
Barr & Tagg's From teaching to learing is the most often requested article from Change mangazine
Bill Camplbell and I started working on New Paradigms in 1993.

41. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom
Informal Cooperative Learning Groups
Formal Cooperative Learning Groups
Cooperative Base Groups
See Cooperative Learning
Handout (CL College-804.doc) 41

42. Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups
Barr & Tagg's From teaching to learing is the most often requested article from Change mangazine
Bill Camplbell and I started working on New Paradigms in 1993.

43. 43

44. Top Three Main Engineering Work Activities
Engineering Total
Design – 36%
Computer applications – 31%
Management – 29%
Civil/Architectural
Management – 45%
Design – 39%
Computer applications – 20%
Burton, L., Parker, L, & LeBold, W U.S. engineering career trends. ASEE Prism, 7(9), 44

45. Listening and Persuading Decision Making Conflict Management
Teamwork Skills
Communication
Listening and Persuading
Decision Making
Conflict Management
Leadership
Trust and Loyalty 45

46. Design team failure is usually due to failed team dynamics
(Leifer, Koseff & Lenshow, 1995).
It’s the soft stuff that’s hard, the hard stuff is easy
(Doug Wilde, quoted in Leifer, 1997)
Professional Skills
(Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J., “The
ABET Professional Skills-Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed?” Journal of Engineering Education, Vo. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 41–55.)

47. Teamwork 47

48. Characteristics of Effective Teams
common sense of direction
Expertise in the group, especially complementary expertise
Common agreed upon goal
Diversity of ideas, background, experiences, etc.
Good coordination among members
Sense of consultation, involvement in the framing
Buy in
Fun
Respect for others
Good communication
Clear expectation
Avoid negativist, be positive, no whining or complaining
Be critical but not personal
Accountability with compassion
Having people do what they’re good at
Work well with supervisor
Social trust
Leadership without dictatorship
Good listening
Clear, well defined timeline and deliverables 48

49. --Katzenbach & Smith (1993)
A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable
• SMALL NUMBER
• COMPLEMENTARY SKILLS
• COMMON PURPOSE & PERFORMANCE GOALS
• COMMON APPROACH
• MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
--Katzenbach & Smith (1993)
The Wisdom of Teams

50. Hackman – Leading Teams
Real Team
Compelling Direction
Enabling Structure
Supportive Organizational Context
Available Expert Coaching
Team Diagnostic Survey (TDS) 50

51. Team Charter
Team name, membership, and roles
Team Mission Statement
Anticipated results (goals)
Specific tactical objectives
Ground rules/Guiding principles for team participation
Shared expectations/aspirations

52. •EVERY member is responsible for the team’s progress and success.
Code of Cooperation
•EVERY member is responsible for the team’s progress and success.
•Attend all team meetings and be on time.
•Come prepared.
•Carry out assignments on schedule.
•Listen to and show respect for the contributions of other members; be an active listener.
•CONSTRUCTIVELY criticize ideas, not persons.
•Resolve conflicts constructively,
•Pay attention, avoid disruptive behavior.
•Avoid disruptive side conversations.
•Only one person speaks at a time.
•Everyone participates, no one dominates.
•Be succinct, avoid long anecdotes and examples.
•No rank in the room.
•Respect those not present.
•Ask questions when you do not understand.
•Attend to your personal comfort needs at any time but minimize team disruption.
•HAVE FUN!! •?
Adapted from Boeing Aircraft Group Team Member Training Manual

53. Ten Commandments: An Affective Code of Cooperation
• Help each other be right, not wrong.
• Look for ways to make new ideas work, not for reasons they won't.
• If in doubt, check it out! Don't make negative assumptions about each other.
• Help each other win, and take pride in each other's victories.
• Speak positively about each other and about your organization at every opportunity.
• Maintain a positive mental attitude no matter what the circumstances.
• Act with initiative and courage, as if it all depends on you.
• Do everything with enthusiasm; it's contagious.
• Whatever you want; give it away.
• Don't lose faith.
• Have fun
Ford Motor Company 53

54. 54

55. Group Processing Plus/Delta Format Delta (Δ) Plus (+)
Things That Group Did Well
Delta (Δ)
Things Group Could Improve

56. Formal Cooperative Learning
Professor's Role in
Formal Cooperative Learning
Specifying Objectives
Making Decisions
Explaining Task, Positive Interdependence, and Individual Accountability
Monitoring and Intervening to Teach Skills
Evaluating Students' Achievement and Group Effectiveness 56

57. Formal Cooperative Learning – Types of Tasks
Jigsaw – Learning new conceptual/procedural material
2. Peer Composition or Editing
3. Reading Comprehension/Interpretation
4. Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation
5. Review/Correct Homework
6. Constructive Academic Controversy
7. Group Tests
Table summarizes my perception of the shift. A version of this table is available in New Paradigms for Engineering Education -- FIE Conf proceedings 97 (avail on the www)
One of the most significant changes that has occurred is the shift from "pouring in knowledge" to "creating a climate where learning flows among students and the professor"

58. Challenged-Based Learning
Problem-based learning
Case-based learning
Project-based learning
Learning by design
Inquiry learning
Anchored instruction
John Bransford, Nancy Vye and Helen Bateman. Creating High-Quality Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn 58

59. Challenge-Based Instruction with the Legacy Cycle
The Challenges
Generate Ideas
Multiple Perspectives
Research & Revise
Test Your Mettle
Go Public
We use a learning cycle to assist us in organizing learning activities to meet specific goals. This cycle basically scaffolds the inquiry process necessary to identify potential solutions to a problem, research those opportunities, and revise them over time. However, part of the learning process is monitoring understanding of critical concepts and receiving opportunities to go deeper into specific concepts. Therefore, we use formative assessment methods where students can test their mettle and return to do additional Research & Revise activities which will help to revise their understanding. 59 59

60. Problem-Based Learning
Problem posed
Identify what we
need to know
Learn it
Apply it
START 60

61. Problem Based Cooperative Learning Format
TASK: Solve the problem(s) or Complete the project.
INDIVIDUAL: Estimate answer. Note strategy.
COOPERATIVE: One set of answers from the group, strive for agreement, make sure everyone is able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem.
EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone must be able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem.
EVALUATION: Best answer within available resources or constraints.
INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: One member from your group may be randomly chosen to explain (a) the answer and (b) how to solve each problem.
EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Active participating, checking, encouraging, and elaborating by all members.
INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group. 61

62. 62

63. Cooperative Base Groups
Are Heterogeneous
Are Long Term (at least one quarter or semester)
Are Small (3-5 members)
Are for support
May meet at the beginning of each session or may meet between sessions
Review for quizzes, tests, etc. together
Share resources, references, etc. for individual projects
Provide a means for covering for absentees 63

64. Design and Implementation of Cooperative Learning – Resources
Design Framework – How People Learn (HPL)
Creating High Quality Learning Environments (Bransford, Vye & Bateman) --
Design & Backward Design Process (Felder & Brent, Fink and Wiggins & McTighe)
Pellegrino – Rethinking and redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment: What contemporary research and theory suggests.
Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Content Resources
Donald, Janet Learning to think: Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Middendorf, Joan and Pace, David Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.
Pedagogies of Engagement - Instructional Format explanation and exercise to model format and to engage workshop participants
Cooperative Learning (Johnson, Johnson & Smith)
Smith web site –
University of Delaware PBL web site –
PKAL – Pedagogies of Engagement – 64