Upload
xavier-greene
View
216
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Student Opinion of Student Opinion of Learning Activities on Learning Activities on
Computing Computing Undergraduate DegreesUndergraduate Degrees
John Colvin and Alan Phelan
University of Worcester
February 2006
Project Origins Catalyst
Constructive Alignment
• Belief in student-centred learning• Admiration of the teaching of some of my
colleagues• Positive anecdotal evidence from students
Project– Student opinion of student-centred learning
activities?– Why did academics incorporate these learning
activities?
Context University of Worcester
– University Title 2005
Computing Students– Modular Scheme– Entry
• 160 UCAS points
• Non-traditional entries
– Likely to come from a less academic background than a decade ago
– Project staff recognise ‘traditional’ approach is inappropriate
Learning Activities 9 modules Year 2/3 students 4-7 weeks Followed an introductory session ..
– Group Discussion & Presentational Activities– On-line discussions– Computer simulations– Graded programming exercises– Investigations using propriety software
On-line discussions
• Encourages deep learning• Discussions are not spontaneous• Staff monitored / encouraged in-depth discussion.
Discussion and Presentations
• Topics - encourage higher level cognitive skills
• e.g. “Compare and contrast the pressures that the DPA and the F of IA place on companies”
• Potential of cooperative learning
Programming Exercises and Examples
Structured series of both examples and also exercises of increasing difficulty
Examples and straightforward exercises may only encourage surface learning more complex exercises require higher levels of problem solving, which involves deep learning
Challenge is to encourage surface learners to move onto the more challenging exercises.
possible by a structured levels of complexity of successive exercises + appropriate support mechanisms.
MCQ tests as formative assessment, might encourage surface learning
Simulation Software (Small Groups)
Proprietary Software (Individually)
• Open-ended questions or analyse / reflect• Formative activity will encourage deep learning• Students focus on summative assessment • Exploit the assessment focus
Learning Activities
Generally– All project modules
• > 50% of timetabled sessions was scheduled for student-centred learning activities
• Academics have addressed the problem of devoting too much time to teaching content
• Project staff are “student-focused”
Student Opinion of Learning Activity
Challenging? Interest? Enable the achievement of the ILO’s? Appropriate for the stage of the course? Frequency? Encourage attendance? Purpose of the activity?
How Challenging?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Too Difficult Challenging - itstretched me
Not verychallenging
Too Easy No Opinion
How Challenging is the Activitiy?
Interesting?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Excited andAbsorbed
Interested No Opinion Uninterested Bored
Level of Interest aroused by Activity
• Deep Learning Enjoyable
Achievement of ILO’s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
All LO's Most LO's No Opinion Some LO's No LO's
Achievement of Learning Outcomes (Student Opinion)
•Student-centred - higher quality learning outcomes. •Disappointing - students exaggerate their abilities. •Other learning opportunities.•Expect better?
Appropriate for Stage of Course
0102030405060708090
VeryAppropriate
Appropriate No Opinion Inappropriate VeryInappropriate
Appropriateness for Stage of Course
•87% -Appropriate / very appropriate
•Encouraging
•Consistent with student views on purpose
How Often?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Every week Half thesessions
No Opinion Occassionally Never
How Frequently should the Learning Activity Occur?
•Staff favour particular activity
•Students favour palette of activities?
Encourage Attendance?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
More likely toattend
No effect No opinion Less likely to attend
Describe how this activity encourages attendance
•Little effect on attendance
•Strategies for non-attendees?
Why were Learning Activities included?
Influence Ranking
Academics Students
So that the lecturer does not need to talk for 3 hours
5th 5th
To encourage students to reflect on what they are learning
2nd 1st
To prevent students from being bored 4th 4th
To exploit the view that students learn better when ‘doing’
1st 2nd
To fill time 6th 6th
To encourage students to work autonomously
3rd 3rd
Academic Awareness of Constructive Alignment
00.5
11.5
22.5
3
3.54
Unaware ofterm
Aware of term,not of meaning
Aware ofterm,not sureof meaning
Aware of termand of
meaning
Awareness of the term "Constructive Alignment"
• Theory not fully appreciated by these academics
• Local phenomenon?
Conclusions– Student Opinion
• Positive & uniform across different activities
• Learning activities are interesting, challenging, supportive and appropriate for the stage of their course
• Preference for a palette of differing learning activities throughout a module
• Only a few students believed that individual activities might encourage attendance
– Academics• Correspondence between academics and students on the why
academics incorporate their learning activity.
• Constructive Alignment theory was not yet fully appreciated by academics
Further Research
To determine the effectiveness of including a palette of differing learning activities throughout a module to better student achievement.
To investigate adopting other strategies with students that have a poor attendance record
To determine whether the lack of awareness of Constructive Alignment theory amongst academics is a general or a local phenomenon
To correlate students’ preference for the type of learning activities with their level of learning.