22
University University of of Calgary Calgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 1 Reconciling a Traditional Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry- Syllabus with an Inquiry- Based Introductory Based Introductory Course Course Katrin Becker Katrin Becker U of Calgary U of Calgary

Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

describes the design of an introductory programming course design as an entire inquiry-based course

Citation preview

Page 1: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 1

Reconciling a Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus Traditional Syllabus

with an Inquiry-with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Based Introductory

CourseCourse

Katrin BeckerKatrin BeckerU of CalgaryU of Calgary

Page 2: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 2

Overview:Overview: IBLIBL

What is it?What is it? How does it work?How does it work?

Challenges for 1Challenges for 1stst year CS. year CS. Making IBL work.Making IBL work. What we did.What we did.

A ‘typical’ class.A ‘typical’ class. Assessment – All about rubrics.Assessment – All about rubrics. Choice – the AssignmentsChoice – the Assignments Costs – Benefits.Costs – Benefits. Improvements.Improvements. Is it Better?….Is it Better?….

Page 3: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 3

Inquiry Based Learning - Inquiry Based Learning - What is it?What is it?

INQUIRY INQUIRY EXPLORATION EXPLORATION1.1. Students drive content by asking questions.Students drive content by asking questions.

2.2. Instructors do NOT control, they guide.Instructors do NOT control, they guide.

3.3. Learning is individualized for pace, depth, even content Learning is individualized for pace, depth, even content (up to a point).(up to a point).

4.4. Given (3), formal exams are largely inappropriate.Given (3), formal exams are largely inappropriate.

5.5. Teachers must draw out and work with the pre-existing Teachers must draw out and work with the pre-existing understandings that their students bring with them.understandings that their students bring with them.

6.6. Emphasis is on developing meta-cognitive skills (higher Emphasis is on developing meta-cognitive skills (higher order thinking) as opposed to simple fact retention.order thinking) as opposed to simple fact retention.

7.7. Offers detailed feedback & critiques*(as opposed to Offers detailed feedback & critiques*(as opposed to right/wrong).right/wrong).

8.8. *NOT* efficient (?)*NOT* efficient (?)

Page 4: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 4

How Does it Work?How Does it Work?Need not be “All or Nothing”Need not be “All or Nothing”

Many courses already have inquiry based Many courses already have inquiry based components.components.

Course content is specified in terms goals Course content is specified in terms goals and outcomes and outcomes

Not in terms of class time spent on a topic:Not in terms of class time spent on a topic: When finished, what will successful students When finished, what will successful students

be able to do? be able to do? How will students demonstrate mastery of a How will students demonstrate mastery of a

topic?topic?

Final grade is built using a measure of Final grade is built using a measure of mastery of the individual components.mastery of the individual components.

Page 5: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 5

11stst Year Challenge Year Challenge

Great to have this freedom in a Great to have this freedom in a capstone course.capstone course.

Different story if the course is core Different story if the course is core or serves as a pre-requisite for or serves as a pre-requisite for something else:something else: Then we have an obligation to meet Then we have an obligation to meet

certain criteria.certain criteria. Also different story in the freshman Also different story in the freshman

and sophomore years – different and sophomore years – different expertise / experience.expertise / experience.

Page 6: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 6

Inquiry Based Learning Inquiry Based Learning – Making it Work– Making it Work

Students must know the goals and outcomes Students must know the goals and outcomes in in advance.advance.

Instructor must be prepared to adapt to students Instructor must be prepared to adapt to students needs, but do not make the goals into moving needs, but do not make the goals into moving targets.targets.

Instructor must be prepared to speak on any topic Instructor must be prepared to speak on any topic in the course in the course at any timeat any time (even without slides) (even without slides)

Instructor must remain Instructor must remain responsible forresponsible for but not but not in in control of control of the class.the class.

Get to know the studentsGet to know the students Trust themTrust them Set deadlines but remain flexibleSet deadlines but remain flexible Be clear on what you want them to learn and why Be clear on what you want them to learn and why

they should learn it.they should learn it.

Page 7: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 7

What We DidWhat We Did

Inquiry-Based Introduction to Inquiry-Based Introduction to Computer ScienceComputer Science Combined CS101 and CS102Combined CS101 and CS102 Primarily programmingPrimarily programming Accepted only top 10%Accepted only top 10% Prior experience *not* requiredPrior experience *not* required No / Few formal lecturesNo / Few formal lectures Learner Driven (within bounds)Learner Driven (within bounds)

Page 8: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 8

A ‘Typical’ ClassA ‘Typical’ Class Format: T-R 75 min. + 2 x 2 hr. Format: T-R 75 min. + 2 x 2 hr.

labslabs ‘‘Lecture’ in classroom w/o Lecture’ in classroom w/o

machinesmachines Movie-time; Q & A; guest speakers; Movie-time; Q & A; guest speakers; ““Just-in-time” lecturesJust-in-time” lectures

Labs in room w/ machine per Labs in room w/ machine per personperson Q & A; unstructured work timeQ & A; unstructured work time Watch program developmentWatch program development Hands on helpHands on help

Page 9: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 9

AssessmentAssessment Goal: assess understanding & mastery Goal: assess understanding & mastery

rather than recallrather than recall Subjective rather than objectiveSubjective rather than objective Provides opportunities for reflection, Provides opportunities for reflection,

revision.revision. Assessment is also used for learning.Assessment is also used for learning. Customized rather than mechanized.Customized rather than mechanized.

Page 10: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 10

Rubric: Units & WeightingRubric: Units & WeightingParticipation & AttendanceParticipation & Attendance   Data RepresentationData RepresentationBasic Hardware FunctionBasic Hardware Function Language Translation & ExecutionLanguage Translation & ExecutionAlgorithmsAlgorithmsProgramming Concepts ***Programming Concepts ***Object-oriented DesignObject-oriented DesignRecursionRecursionEvent-Driven ProgrammingEvent-Driven ProgrammingProgram Testing ***Program Testing ***

*** Note additional requirements.*** Note additional requirements.

2020555588

101020201616

3333

1010

Page 11: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 11

A note on A note on Participation & AttendanceParticipation & Attendance

NOT designed as independent learning (probably not NOT designed as independent learning (probably not recommended for most freshmen anyway).recommended for most freshmen anyway).

Components:Components:1.1. Attendance (lecture & lab: few; some; most)Attendance (lecture & lab: few; some; most)2.2. Participation: In classParticipation: In class

1.1. actively contributes to discussion (including non-verbal actively contributes to discussion (including non-verbal communication and other contributions: obvious attention)communication and other contributions: obvious attention)

2.2. contributes artifacts (show-and-tell; www links; etc.) -OR- other contributes artifacts (show-and-tell; www links; etc.) -OR- other form of contributions - helping other class-matesform of contributions - helping other class-mates

3.3. GroupworkGroupwork1.1. communicates effectively with other group memberscommunicates effectively with other group members2.2. contributes to solutioncontributes to solution

4.4. Critical Incident QuestionnaireCritical Incident Questionnaire1.1. Weekly (engaged, distanced, helpful, confusing, Weekly (engaged, distanced, helpful, confusing,

surprise)surprise)2.2. Meta – analysis of weekly CIQ’sMeta – analysis of weekly CIQ’s

Page 12: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 12

Coursework: Coursework: Overall Overall RequirementsRequirements

Assignments: 6 Submissions TotalAssignments: 6 Submissions Total Assignments may be resubmitted as often as desired Assignments may be resubmitted as often as desired

without penalty. without penalty. Any single assignment may be resubmitted to meet Any single assignment may be resubmitted to meet

upgraded requirements (e.g.. An Introductory-level upgraded requirements (e.g.. An Introductory-level assignment may be re-submitted as an Intermediate assignment may be re-submitted as an Intermediate level assignment as long as it meets the level assignment as long as it meets the requirements.)requirements.)

Additional Requirements: Additional Requirements: 1.1. 2 X 2 X solitary work. solitary work. 2.2. 2 X2 X group work. group work.

1.1. 2 X2 X Intermediate. Intermediate. 2.2. 1 X1 X Wasabi.Wasabi.

1.1. 2 X2 X demo demo. . Only one will be marked. Only one will be marked. **2.2. 2 X2 X expo expo. . Only one will be marked. Only one will be marked.

* One is for practice* One is for practice

Page 13: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 13

Rubric: Sample Points Rubric: Sample Points BreakdownBreakdown

5 Programming Concepts 0 78 143 20a Data Types 0 10 20b Input/Output 0 14 25c Arrays 0 14 25d Flow of Control 0 14 25e Sub-Programs 0 14 25f *** Documentation 0 12 23

UNIT:

YOUR SCORE

Minimum Required

Points

Maximum Points

Possible% of total

weight

Page 14: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 14

Rubric: quick tourRubric: quick tour

Choices are not intended to be completely discrete.Choices are not intended to be completely discrete. Like sliding scale.Like sliding scale. Fever thermometer analogy - *not* additive Fever thermometer analogy - *not* additive i.e. 2 X good does not = excellenti.e. 2 X good does not = excellent

Main Main Objective / Objective / Topic, Topic, E.g. E.g.

DocumentationDocumentation

AttemptAttempt

(minimal (minimal pass)pass)

MeetsMeets

(OK = C)(OK = C)ExceedsExceeds

(good = B)(good = B)ExemplaryExemplary

(excellent = (excellent = A)A)

Describe what Describe what students must students must know / do to know / do to demonstrate demonstrate

masterymastery

What would What would be an be an

acceptable acceptable attempt?attempt?

What is What is “good “good

enough”?enough”?

What is above What is above average?average?

What is excellent?What is excellent?

E.g. E.g. Choice of Choice of Variable NamesVariable Names

[1] [1] MeaninglessMeaningless or misleading or misleading namesnames

[2] [2] SomeSome poor poor choices. Most choices. Most identifiers identifiers explained where explained where appropriate.appropriate.

[[33] ] Most Most names names made sense. made sense. Explained – and Explained – and most explanations most explanations are appropriate.are appropriate.

[4] [4] MeaningfulMeaningful identifier names [some identifier names [some single letter names are single letter names are

OK, such as i,j for OK, such as i,j for indices]. Explanations indices]. Explanations

of identifiers where of identifiers where appropriate.appropriate.

Page 15: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 15

Rubric: Sample TopicRubric: Sample Topic

A

Exemplary

Total30

[5] Able to discuss implications for execution.

[5] Can create algorithm and implement.

[5] Can create algorithm and implement.

[5] Able to solve candidate problems.

[5] Can create algorithm and implement.

[5] Can handle pre-, post-, and infix recursion.

Column: D C B

Row

: Recursion:YOUR

SCOREAttempt Meets Requirements Exceeds Requirements

Minimum Points14 0 10

1 The concept of recursion. [1] Close [3] Define. [4] Define, with examples.

2 Recursive mathematical functions.

[1] Can follow mathematical

functions that are recursive.

[3] Can follow in code.[4] Can write own when given

algorithm.

3 Simple recursive procedures. [1] Able to identify. [3] Can follow in code.[4] Can write own when given

algorithm.

4 Divide-and-conquer strategies.[1] Able to describe

the term.[3] Able to implement, given

algorithms.[4] Able to identify candidate

problems.

5 Recursive backtracking. [1] Able to identify. [3] Can explain.[4] Can write own when given

algorithm.

6 Implementation of recursion. [1] Almost. [3] Simple, working example.[4] Able to translate appropriate

non-recursive solutions into recursive ones and vice-versa.

Must exceed requirements in at least one area.

Page 16: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 16

Making a Rubric:Making a Rubric: Criterion Based MarkingCriterion Based Marking

not scaled or distributednot scaled or distributed Top – Down DesignTop – Down Design

Start with Whole CourseStart with Whole Course Before: What do they already know & do?Before: What do they already know & do? After: At the end of this course, what should After: At the end of this course, what should

students know and be capable of?students know and be capable of?• As detailed as possibleAs detailed as possible

What constitutes acceptable evidence?What constitutes acceptable evidence? What is the relative importance of this What is the relative importance of this

component?component? Match amount of work to relative importanceMatch amount of work to relative importance

Page 17: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 17

Choice – The AssignmentsChoice – The Assignments As many as possible.As many as possible. ClassifyClassify You define for your curriculumYou define for your curriculum

Beginner Beginner up to 1D arraysup to 1D arrays

Intermediate Intermediate arrays to simple objectsarrays to simple objects

WasabiWasabiInheritance (OO), Inheritance (OO), ororLarge, complex problemLarge, complex problem

Page 18: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 18

The Assignments: The Assignments: Mapping onto the rubricMapping onto the rubric

Have sample solutionsHave sample solutions Helps classify Helps classify Indicates what criteria this meetsIndicates what criteria this meets

Maps solution onto objectivesMaps solution onto objectives Remember there are multiple Remember there are multiple

‘right’ answers‘right’ answers Let students tell *you* what theirs Let students tell *you* what theirs

doesdoes

Page 19: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 19

BenefitsBenefits Students in control of their Students in control of their

own learningown learning = greater personal = greater personal

investmentinvestment Emphasis on deep rather than Emphasis on deep rather than

surface learningsurface learning Bulk of prep. done once Bulk of prep. done once

(before term)(before term) Greater flexibilityGreater flexibility

Page 20: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 20

Costs - RequirementsCosts - Requirements Time consuming – during termTime consuming – during term Not suited to large classesNot suited to large classes Instructor must know material Instructor must know material

thoroughlythoroughly Students must *want* to learnStudents must *want* to learn

Page 21: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 21

ImprovementsImprovements DO NOT combine fast-track with DO NOT combine fast-track with

inquiry-based format.inquiry-based format. Deadlines Deadlines CheckpointsCheckpoints More supplementary support:More supplementary support:

TutorialsTutorials NotesNotes

Allow mid stream transfer into Allow mid stream transfer into regular course?regular course?

Page 22: Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course

University ofUniversity of CalgaryCalgary © 2004 K.Becker Reconciling IBL in Traditional Class 30-Sep-04 22

Thanks!Thanks!