1. Washington State University
Pedagogies of Engagement – Cooperative Learning and Problem-Based Learning
Karl A. Smith
Engineering Education – Purdue University
Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota
Washington State University
February 2010

2. Session Objectives Participants will be able to :
Describe Key Features of Pedagogies of engagement, especially cooperative learning
Explain rationale for Active and Cooperative Learning
Describe key features of Cooperative Learning
Summarize research on How People Learn
Describe key features of the Backward Design process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment - Pedagogy
Identify connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs
Participants will begin applying key elements to the design on a course, class session or learning module 2

3. “Throughout the whole enterprise, the core issue, in my view, is the mode of teaching and learning that is practiced. Learning ‘about’ things does not enable students to acquire the abilities and understanding they will need for the twenty-first century. We need new pedagogies of engagement that will turn out the kinds of resourceful, engaged workers and citizens that America now requires.”
Russ Edgerton (reflecting on higher education projects funded by the Pew Memorial Trust) 3

4. 8:30-9:30?Take copies of Active Lrn, HTMI, New Paradigms,
Lila M. Smith

5. Pedago-pathologies Amnesia Fantasia Inertia
Lee Shulman – MSU Med School – PBL Approach (late 60s – early 70s), Currently 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,

6. What do we do about these pathologies? – Lee Shulman Activity
Reflection
Collaboration
Passion
Combined with generative content and the creation of powerful learning communities
Shulman, Lee S Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4), 6

7. 8:30-9:30?Take copies of Active Lrn, HTMI, New Paradigms,
Lila M. Smith

8. Pedagogies of Engagement
(yeah! The red arrow is pointing at one of our undergrad researchers—Michelle Valeriano) 8

9. Reflection and Dialogue
Individually reflect on Active and Cooperative Learning Successes. Write for about 1 minute
Context? Subject, Year, School
Structure/Procedure? What did you do/experience?
Outcome? Evidence of Success
Discuss with your neighbor for about 3 minutes
Select Success Story, Comment, Question, etc. that you would like to present to the whole group if you are randomly selected

10. 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) 10

11. 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. 11

12. Make solar energy economical Provide energy from fusion
Here are the Grand Challenges for engineering as determined by a committee of the National Academy of Engineering:
Make solar energy economical
Provide energy from fusion
Develop carbon sequestration methods
Manage the nitrogen cycle
Provide access to clean water
Restore and improve urban infrastructure
Advance health informatics
Engineer better medicines
Reverse-engineer the brain
Prevent nuclear terror
Secure cyberspace
Enhance virtual reality
Advance personalized learning
Engineer the tools of scientific discovery 12

13. National Research Council Reports:
How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (1999).
How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice (2000).
Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment (2001).
The Knowledge Economy and Postsecondary Education (2002). Chapter 6 – Creating High-Quality Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. Designing Learning Environments Based on HPL (How People Learn)16

17. Resources
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.
Pellegrino – Rethinking and Redesigning Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Bransford, Vye and Bateman – Creating High Quality Learning Environments

18. 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 18

19. 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] 19

20. 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) 20

21. •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"

22. 22

23. Book Ends on a Class Session23

24. 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"

25. 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. 25

26. 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. 26

27. 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 27

28. 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. 28

29. 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 29

30. 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) 30

31. Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with Concept Tests
Physics
Peer Instruction
Eric Mazur - Harvard –
Peer Instruction –
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: Derek Bok Center – 31

32. 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 32
Pretest (Percent)

33. <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

34. 34

35. 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. 35

36. 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.

37. Strategies for Energizing Large Classes: From Small Groups to
Learning Communities:
Jean MacGregor,
James Cooper,
Karl Smith,
Pamela Robinson
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 81, 2000.
Jossey- Bass
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"

38. 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) 38

39. Formal Cooperative Learning
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.

40. 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

41. Small-Group Learning: Meta-analysis
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1),
Small-group (predominantly cooperative) learning in postsecondary science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) reports from 1980 or later, 39 of which met the rigorous inclusion criteria for meta-analysis.
The main effect of small-group learning on achievement, persistence, and attitudes among undergraduates in SMET was significant and positive. Mean effect sizes for achievement, persistence, and attitudes were 0.51, 0.46, and 0.55, respectively.
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"

42. Formal Cooperative Learning
Jigsaw
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"

43. 43

44. Listening and Persuading Decision Making Conflict Management
Teamwork Skills
Communication
Listening and Persuading
Decision Making
Conflict Management
Leadership
Trust and Loyalty 44

45. 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 45

46. 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 46

47. 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. 47

48. 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 48