Student Learning: Improving Practice

Table of contents :
STUDENT LEARNING: IMPROVING PRACTICE
STUDENT LEARNING: IMPROVING PRACTICE
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
EDITOR
CONTRIBUTORS
INTRODUCTION
IMPROVING LEARNING AND PARTICIPATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
CONCLUSION
Chapter 1: I THINK THAT I THINK I KNOW WHAT I'M DOING: IMPROVING LEARNING THROUGH THE USE OF META-COGNITION
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION – DEVELOPMENTAL BACKGROUND
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE PROCESSES INVOLVED IN METACOGNITION?
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF METACOGNITION
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
Chapter 2: FUTURE DIRECTION OF ATTRIBUTION RETRAINING FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES: A REVIEW
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
SELF-EFFICACY AND MOTIVATION
ATTRIBUTIONS FOR LEARNING
LEARNING DIFFICULTIES AND ACADEMIC SELF-ESTEEM
INTERVENTIONS TARGETING ATTRIBUTIONS
COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL BASED PROGRAMS
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 3: THE 21ST CENTURY LAW STUDENT: THE LECTURE ROOM OR THE MOBILE PHONE?
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
BLENDED LEARNING
THE DIFFERING DEMANDS OF FULL TIME AND PART TIME STUDENTS
STUDENT OPINION ON FLEXIBLE BLENDED LEARNING
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONING TO REINFORCE I-LECTURES
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS, INCLUDING FORMATIVE MCQS
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 4: THE CREATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERACTIVE OPPORTUNITES TO PROMOTE LEARNING BETWEEN LECTURES
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
USING COURSE WEB SITE TOOLS TO PROMOTE COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION
ONLINE SELF-ASSESSMENT
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERACTIVE E-LEARNING MODULE CONTENT
MOBILE LEARNING
STUDENTS ARE AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 5: A DESIGN FRAMEWORK FOR ENHANCING ON-LINE LEARNING
ABSTRACT
THE CONTEXT
LEARNING OCCURS IN A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE
LEARNING IS LEARNER CENTRED
LEARNING IS FLEXIBLE AND BASED ON INDIVIDUAL NEEDS
LEARNING IS RESOURCE BASED, AND TECHNOLOGY MEDIATED
LEARNING IS BOTH INDIVIDUAL AND NETWORKED
LEARNING IS DEMONSTRATED WHEN NEW, AND VALUED KNOWLEDGE IS CREATED
LEARNING IS COGNITIVE, AFFECTIVE, SOCIAL AND SENSORI—MOTOR
LEARNING IS BEST SUPPORTED THROUGH CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT OF ASSESSMENT, CURRICULUM AND PEDAGOGY
LEARNING IS BEST WHEN ACTIVITIES AREPURPOSEFUL AND ALIGNED WITH ASSESSMENT
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 6: A STUDY OF FACTORS INFLUENCING SUCCESS IN AN INTRO TO ENGLISH LINGUISTICS
ABSTRACT
LITERATURE REVIEW
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FUTURE RESEARCH
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
APPENDIX A: SURVEY QUESTIONS
REFERENCES
Chapter 7: SUPPORTING STUDENT LEARNING THROUGH COLLABORATIVE ASSESSMENT TASKS
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
LITERATURE REVIEW
CONTEXT
METHOD
FINDINGS
DISCUSSION
COLLABORATIVE ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES: CASE STUDIES
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 8: EXAMINING THE ASSESSMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR CULTURAL CONNECTEDNESS FOR STUDENT LEARNING: A SOCIOCULTURAL ANALYSIS
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND
OVERVIEW
METHODOLOGY
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 9: STUDENT PATHWAYS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
ABSTRACT
STUDENT PATHWAYS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
CONCEPTIONS OF GLOBAL CITIZEN VALUES
CONCEPTIONS OF ANTECEDENTS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
A SOCIAL IDENTITY PERSPECTIVE OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EVIDENCE OF ANTECEDENTS AND OUTCOMES OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF NORMATIVE ENVIRONMENT AS A PATHWAY TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF GLOBAL AWARENESS AS A PATHWAY TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
ENGENDERING GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Chapter 10: ACTION-EMOTION STYLE, TEST ANXIETY AND RESILIENCE IN UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REFERENCES
Chapter 11: CRITICAL THINKING: FOCAL POINT FOR A CULTURE OF INQUIRY
ABSTRACT
THEMATIC QUOTE
INTRODUCTION: PURPOSE AND BIASES OF THIS CHAPTER
CULTURE OF INQUIRY AND RESPECT – INSEPARABLE ELEMENTS
CROSSING DISCIPLINES AND CURRICULUM YEARS – LIMITS OF SILOS AND PROGRESSION FROM NOVICE TO EXPERT
CRITICAL THINKING – DEFINE IT AND MOVE ON
SETTINGS TO ENHANCE CRITICAL THINKING
KNOWLEDGE AND CRITICAL THINKING: A LITTLE THE SAME BUT MOSTLY DIFFERENT
COMPONENTS TO GUIDE LEARNING AND ASSESS PERFORMANCE – THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS THE OUTCOME
A MODEL TO GUIDE LEARNING AND ASSESS PERFORMANCE
FULFILLMENT AND LIMITS ON ASSESSMENT: ASSESSMENT AND RANKING
INTRODUCTION TO A MODEL FOR CRITICAL THINKING ASSESSMENT
ELEMENTS OF A MODEL FOR ASSESSING CRITICAL THINKING
GOOD NEWS: WE ARE ALREADY DOING MUCH OF THIS
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REFERENCES
INDEX

Citation preview

EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD

STUDENT LEARNING IMPROVING PRACTICE

No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means. The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, medical or any other professional services.

EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD Additional books in this series can be found on Nova’s website under the Series tab.

Additional e-books in this series can be found on Nova’s website under the e-book tab.

EDUCATION IN A COMPETITIVE AND GLOBALIZING WORLD

STUDENT LEARNING IMPROVING PRACTICE

CHRISTOPHER BOYLE EDITOR

New York

Copyright © 2013 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher. For permission to use material from this book please contact us: Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175 Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com NOTICE TO THE READER The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material. Any parts of this book based on government reports are so indicated and copyright is claimed for those parts to the extent applicable to compilations of such works. Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise contained in this publication. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the subject matter covered herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal or any other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. FROM A DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS. Additional color graphics may be available in the e-book version of this book.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data ISBN:  (eBook)

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. † New York

CONTENTS Acknowledgments

vii

List of Contributors

ix

Introduction Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

xiii I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing: Improving Learning through the Use of Meta-Cognition Fraser Lauchlan

1

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining for Students with Learning Difficulties: A Review Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

13

The 21st Century Law Student: The Lecture Room or the Mobile Phone? Tom Serby

31

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities to Promote Learning between Lectures Jacqueline Carnegie

43

Chapter 5

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

Chapter 6

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols, Julie McCown and Amanda McCain

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks Rosario Hernández Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness for Student Learning: A Sociocultural Analysis Val Klenowski, Stephen Connollyand Robert Funnell

59

79

91

105

vi

Contents

Chapter 9

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

Chapter 10

Action-Emotion Style, Test Anxiety and Resilience in Undergraduate Students Jesús de la Fuente, María Cardelle-Elawar, Paul Sander and David Putwain

Chapter 11 Index

Critical Thinking: Focal Point for a Culture of Inquiry David C. Johnsen

121

139

151 171

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The people whom we meet and the people whom we learn from influence us. This book acknowledges both the student and the lecturer/teacher, as the fusion of interest and discussion creates thinking, which fosters the development of a cerebral environment, thus benefiting society. The Editor would like to acknowledge the generous editorial and proofing support from Ange Jarman, Jake Kraska, Shane Costello, Tony Mowbray, Sarah Rostron, Amira Bosjnak, Linda Varcoe, Joe Anderson, and Jessica Grembecki.

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS EDITOR Chris Boyle, Ph.D., is a Senior Lecturer in Psychology in the Faculty of Education at Monash University, Australia. Chris has previously worked as a secondary school teacher and as a school psychologist. His main research interests are in the area of teacher perceptions of inclusion and students’ attributions for success and failure in learning. He is currently Editor of the Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist and he has published widely in psychology and education with over 125 citations to his work since 2007. The Open University Press has published his latest book, What Works in Inclusion. Current information is available at: http://education.monash.edu/profiles/cboyle.

CONTRIBUTORS Rebecca Babcock is Associate Professor of English at the University of Texas of the Permian Basin, USA. Her research interests include writing centers, disability, and metaresearch. Her latest book is Tell Me How it Reads: Tutoring Writing with Deaf and Hearing Students in the Writing Center, published by Gallaudet University Press. María Cardelle-Elawar is an Emeritus Professor of Educational Psychology at Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, USA. She has active research interests with recent publications in measuring teacher regulatory process, and students’ learning processes. Jacqueline Carnegie, Ph.D., M.Ed. is an Associate Professor with the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Ottawa, Canada. When not lecturing, she develops online learning and self-testing tools for undergraduate students studying anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology. She was recently awarded a University of Ottawa Chair in Teaching. Stephen Connolly Ph.D., is a teacher and researcher with the Faculty of Education Queensland University of Technology. His research interests include assessment practices and sociology in education. Stephen was a research team member with a major Australian Research Council funded project to develop new modes of assessment of the capacities, skills

x

Christopher Boyle

and knowledge of at-risk adolescents who have left formal schooling. He has published in the fields of evaluation and assessment and sociology of education. Wendy Fasso has gained a Masters degree in Education Technology and has spent four years as an education technology expert and professional development facilitator in schools across Queensland, Australia. She has a particular interest in digital pedagogy and the transformation of learning with technology. Wendy is a lecturer in education at Central Queensland University, Bundaberg. Jesús de la Fuente is Professor of Educational Psychology in the Departament of Psychology at the University of Almería, Spain. He is Editor-in-chief of the Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology. His research interests are focused on studying the processes of teaching and learning in the university, and personal self-regulation and motivational-affective process of learning. Robert Funnell is a sociologist of education at Griffith University, Queensland, Australia with an interest in biography and life transitions in rural and urban economies. Dr. Rosario Hernández lectures in Spanish at University College Dublin, where she is also a Fellow in Teaching and Academic Development. Her research interests include second language learning, assessment of student learning, and teaching methodologies. She regularly publishes in international journals and books, and presents her work at international conferences. Dr. David Johnsen received his Doctorate in Dental Science from the University of Michigan, 1970, his MS Pediatric Dentistry, University of Iowa, 1973, and has been the Dean of Dentistry, University of Iowa, since 1995. His Research focuses across the following areas: tooth innervation indicating capacity to transmit pain impulses; early childhood caries/caries patterns in preschoolers. David was the American Dental Education Association President from 2002-03, and is currently Dental and Craniofacial Research Council Member (NIH) (2010-). Jemima Koles is a Psychologist specialising in the fields of educational and developmental psychology. She is currently teaching on the undergraduate program at Monash University in the areas of developmental, biological, social, and cognitive psychology. Her research and practice interests include learning difficulties, mindfulness, and positive self-esteem. Iva Katzarska-Miller is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Transylvania University in Lexington, Kentucky. She teaches classes related to cultural psychology, social justice, and diversity. Her research interests focus on self-stereotyping, interpersonal relationships, and global citizenship. Val Klenowski is a Professor of Education at the Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. She has research interests in curriculum and assessment reform and development, evaluation, assessment and learning and social justice issues. Recent research

List of Contributors

xi

interests include teacher judgement, social moderation in the context of standards-driven reform, culture responsive assessment and pedagogy and the use of digital portfolios. Val has published in the fields of assessment and learning, curriculum and evaluation. Dr. Cecily Knight is Associate Dean (Teaching & Learning) at James Cook University, Australia. She has more than 25 years experience in the field of education and a keen interest in blended learning and pedagogies for using new technologies in higher education. Bruce Allen Knight is Professor of Education at Central Queensland University, Australia. His current research interests are in learning design and pedagogy. He has more than 200 publications and in 2006 was honoured with a Fellowship of the International Academy of Research in Learning Disabilities. Fraser Lauchlan, PhD, is an Honorary Lecturer at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland and a registered educational psychologist. He is the owner of his own consultancy business Fraser Lauchlan Associates (www.fraserlauchlan.com). He has published extensively in many areas of educational psychology. His latest book is entitled Improving Learning Through Dynamic Assessment, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Amanda McCain is a doctoral student at Texas A&M University-Commerce whose research focus is Composition and New Media Studies. Her dissertation will look the theoretical application of flow and video games as text in First Year Composition courses. She completed her MA in English at the University of Texas-Permian Basin. Julie McCown is a Ph.D. Candidate and Graduate Teaching Assistant at the University of Texas at Arlington. Her research interests include Early American Literature, Animal Studies, and Digital Humanities. McCown received her M.A. in English from the University of Texas at the Permian Basin in 2011. Jack Nichols is a veteran of the United States Marine Corps and has spent most of his working life in the oil fields of West Texas. He earned his bachelor’s degree in psychology from The University of Texas of the Permian Basin and has a master’s degree pending at that same university. David Putwain is a Senior Lecturer in Psychology at Edge Hill University, UK. He is hoping to shed new light on the effect of examination-related stress on pupils and provide some hard evidence on a topic so far shaped predominantly by speculation and guesswork. He worked for several years for one of the English awarding boards at A and AS-Level and started to wonder about the psychological factors that impact on performance. Suzanne Rathbun is a lecturer in Psychology and the data analyst for the Critical Thinking Initiative at the University of Texas of the Permian Basin. Her research interests are in relation to development of adolescents in our changing world. She has presented at both regional and international conferences.

xii

Christopher Boyle

Stephen Reysen is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Texas A&M UniversityCommerce. He teaches classes related to social psychology, intergroup relations, and multicultural diversity. His research interests include topics related to personal (e.g., threats to interpersonal public identity) and social identity (e.g., global citizenship). Paul Sander is a Principal Lecturer in psychology at the University of Wales Institute Cardiff in the UK. He has active research interests and recent publications in measuring students’ academic confidence, exploring different approaches to studying between male and female students. He is also an academic with dyslexia. Tom Serby qualified as a solicitor in England in 1995 and practised law in the City of London becoming a Solicitor Advocate with rights of audience in all higher courts in 2001; the same year as he joined Exeter University as a law lecturer. Since 2007, Tom has taught at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge where he lectures in business and employment law at undergraduate and Masters level. His research specialisms include learning and teaching and sports law and he has presented various conference papers including at the SLSA conference and has been published in various academic journals including the Liverpool Law Review and the International Sports Law Review.

INTRODUCTION IMPROVING LEARNING AND PARTICIPATION ST IN THE 21 CENTURY EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT This book is attempting to bring to the reader an eclectic group of examples of educational practise, which will assist in improving the knowledge of the reader. Many respected academics express their skills and expertise in the various projects, which promote good teaching practice. If you are a practitioner and reading this book then you are already interested in adapting your style and open to suggestions for improvement, as we all should be in the role that we are in. No book is complete or can be regarded as the authority on any subject and this one does not profess to be. Continual improvement in our methods is a laudable goal in the academic profession and this book will afford the reader some excellent insights and discussion points but what aspects are regarded as useful, will depend on the individual taste of each reader. It would be an understatement to suggest that education is as important as it is universally desirable and that most governments and international organisations continually strive to provide access to education whether it be primary, secondary or tertiary in type. An educated population adds value to the country whether in social benefits or that of a more skilled workforce. If we agree that the promotion of widely accessible education is key to a functioning state then the quality of that education system is paramount. The key aspect to successful education is that of being free from government interference and that aside, the main ingredient is that of the quality of the instruction, whether in the school or university system. Lecturing and teaching are both art forms, at least if it is done well, and these have to be cultivated and honed. As examples, the best engineers or psychologists do not necessarily make the best lecturers and this is the same for all professions. Maximising the quality and strength of the human component and the interaction between student and lecturer is paramount if learning is to be existent in places of learning. A cartoon that this chapter author saw in a higher education publication a number of years ago had the scenario where a person was telling his friend that he had taught his dog to speak and the friend remarked at how wonderful this was and what a great teacher he must be. He asked for this to be shown to him but the dog owner said ‘I didn’t say that he could speak but only that I taught him to do it’. Many people can teach but whether they do it effectively and whether their students learn is a moot point. This book attempts to provide the reader with strategies and programs that have

xiv

Christopher Boyle

been successful in very diverse teaching environments around the world. Not every chapter will be applicable to every reader but there are many aspects, which allow the successful instructor to advance their facilitation skills and hopefully improve their practise and thus learning and participation in the 21st century. This publication contains eleven exciting and innovative chapters, which cover education both in the school and that of the tertiary sector. The scope is vast and the writing lively, with each chapter bringing a particular pedagogical perspective which the reader should find enlightening and refreshing. The first two chapters in the book have a focus on school education, however the content is equally attributable to other education sectors. In Chapter One, ‘I think that I think I know what I’m doing: Improving learning through the use of meta-cognition’, Lauchlan focuses on providing the reader with an overview of metacognitive processes in an educational setting. He discusses practical methods for educational professionals to motivate and inspire their students through cognitive techniques. Lauchlan uses straightforward examples, which provide a valuable contribution to improving learning processes in student-teacher interaction. In Chapter Two, ‘The future direction of attribution retraining for students with learning difficulties: A review’, Knowles and Boyle introduce to the reader the importance of understanding the role of students’ attributions for success or failure in learning and how their motivation to complete future work is affected as a result. Solutions are presented as to how better to understand and alter current teaching practise to improve students’ ability to achieve in school but also to recognize their own inherent ability to work positively. Chapter Three begins the chapters, which focuses specifically on online technology. Serby starts this section with the chapter entitled, ‘The 21st Century Law Student: The Lecture Room or the Mobile Phone?’ which discussed the findings of a research study that attempted to move from face-to-face teaching to that of blended learning with some students receiving their teaching input by podcast. Serby’s findings provide useful points for how teaching on university courses may evolve in future years. In Chapter Four, ‘The creation and implementation of interactive opportunities to promote learning between lectures’, Carnegie puts forward various technologically influenced strategies which are designed to maintain a link between lecturers and students outside of the teaching room. Practical examples are used from Carnegie’s own research work which highlight adaptable solutions which the reader may find some benefit in adopting in their own respective teaching environments. Chapter Five completes the section on technology with Fasso and colleagues whose chapter entitled ‘A design framework for enhancing on-line learning’ discuss various pedagogical approaches, which can be influenced and complemented by using technology in learning. Babcock and colleagues in Chapter Six, ‘A study of factors influencing success in an introduction to English linguistics’, emphasize the complexities in having students enrol in this subject with below average reading ability. Findings from their study are discussed including methods to assist students whose reading ability is below the requirements for the course. In Chapter Seven entitled, ‘Supporting student learning through collaborative assessment tasks’, Hernández puts forward the case for students to be more involved in collaborative learning and stresses the potential benefits of peer assessment as a key tool in pedagogical techniques such as Problem Based Learning. In Chapter Eight Klenowski and colleagues write on the subject of ‘Examining the assessment opportunities for cultural connectedness for student learning: A sociocultural analysis’ from an Australian perspective. They put forward methods for teachers working in

Introduction

xv

schools to consider more of the cultural aspects of the students that they are teaching and this is especially so in respect of indigenous students in Australia who tend me marginalised in many aspects of Australian schooling society. Continuing the theme of social connectedness, Reysen and colleagues consider in Chapter Nine ‘Student Pathways to Global Citizenship’, where a review of the current literature is discussed in relation to what exactly the term ‘global citizenship’ means and how this can influence the current teachings in university. Practical suggestions are offered so as to ensure that the student-lecturer educational interactions are improved and thus made more effective. In the penultimate chapter of the book, de la Fuente and colleagues discuss, in Chapter Ten, ‘Action-emotion style, test anxiety and resilience in undergraduate students’ where a study is reported which illustrates the certain characteristics which are inherent in an undergraduate university population. Links are made between how students react in stressful situations and how they attribute success or failure in dealing with certain situations. The authors put forward suggestions for how resilience can be improved and strengthened in this university population. In Chapter Eleven, the final chapter, Johnsen considers ‘Critical thinking: Focal point for a culture of inquiry’, as an essential component in the teaching of university students. The author suggests that critical thinking is an essential component of university teaching, which does not have the same influence as in previous years and who can disagree. Johnsen is an advocate for universities promoting ‘thinking’ in their courses and examples from practise are illustrated which demonstrate the successful building of a culture of inquiry amongst the students.

CONCLUSION This book attempts to bring together a very diverse group of academics from various subject disciplines, university and schools, and it is international in context. This publication puts forward various suggestions and tangible examples of how pedagogy can be enhanced and how technology can be used to further improve student outcomes. Whether this book manages to meet these to the satisfaction of the reader will not be something that the author can judge. It is hoped that the following chapters will provide some suggestions for different teaching styles, which may have worked in a university before, and with cultural and subject adaptations these can be used to improve your pedagogical approach. The chapters that you will read are evidence based and have been written by esteemed academics in their field thus illustrating chapters of quality that I hope you will enjoy and ultimately benefit from their content.

Christopher Boyle Monash University, Australia

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 1

I THINK THAT I THINK I KNOW WHAT I’M DOING: IMPROVING LEARNING THROUGH THE USE OF META-COGNITION Fraser Lauchlan University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, UK

ABSTRACT The concept of metacognition and the use of meta-cognitive strategies is an approach to learning that has been around for many decades, however, the extent to which it has been adopted widely in education could be questioned. This chapter will provide some background to metacognition, describing the process in detail and outlining research studies that have demonstrated the effectiveness of metacognition in a range of different educational settings. The chapter will also offer some practical examples of how to implement metacognition in the classroom that will hopefully help students and teachers to profit from this valuable technique.

INTRODUCTION – DEVELOPMENTAL BACKGROUND What is metacognition? A simple definition that is often seen in introductory textbooks for psychology students and teachers is the following, “metacognition is the ability to think about one’s own thought processes” (Cole and Cole, 2001, p.495). But what does this mean in practice? And how can this be valuable in learning? It is the purpose of this chapter to answer these questions and to offer some useful, practical strategies that will help improve the metacognition of students in various education settings and hence their ability to learn. If I were to ask you to remember and then recall a list of 20 items that are commonly found in a shopping list, and then asked you afterwards how you approached such a task, your answer would give me an idea of your level of metacognitive skill.

2

Fraser Lauchlan

You may have considered different strategies (for example, categorising the items appropriately, imagining pictures of them, or thinking about where they are found in your local supermarket) and then decided to stick to one; or you maybe decided to use a combination of these. Your awareness of how you approached the task, and the strategies you considered and then adopted, represent the metacognitive process you would have gone through. It is generally accepted in the literature that metacognition is a fundamental cognitive process that helps promote the cognitive development of children, young people and adults. As demonstrated in the anecdote above, metacognition can help us to understand how difficult a problem may be and will help us to decide upon an appropriate strategy in order to solve it. In addition, metacognitive strategies might help us to reflect on what we have done and, if necessary, make appropriate corrections if we have made mistakes. Metacognition is linked to an information-processing perspective, in other words, it can relate to the different ways in which people take on board information, use this information and then store it (Siegler, 1991). As children mature, their ability to process information improves and becomes more sophisticated, which, in turn, helps them to problem-solve more efficiently. Children’s ability to process information can be influenced by, the speed of processing (scanning, recognising and comparing), their memory (including ‘chunking’, i.e. logically grouping responses or items into one’s memory and remembering the groups rather than the individual items), and their level of concentration. All of these skills can be influenced by the child’s ability to use metacognition, for example, the use of strategies such as planning, monitoring and revising. Young children are not able to recognise, for example, when they make an error, whereas older children, as their metacognitive processes improve, are able to know when they do not understand something, or indeed, if they have made an error (Veenman, Van Hout-Wolters and Afflerbach, 2006). The increase in the level of sophistication of a child’s metacognition often reflects their understanding of a theory of mind, which is their knowledge and beliefs about the mental states and motives of others, which help them to explain and predict their behaviour. A classic theory of mind task, and widely adopted in research into the concept is the Sally-Anne problem (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985; Doody et al., 1998, Frith, 1989). The Sally-Anne problem is a story involving two children – Sally and Anne – who are playing together with a ball and two different coloured boxes: one red and one green (for example). After they have played for a while, Sally has to go out so she decides to place the ball in the red box. While she is out, Anne takes the ball from the red box and after playing for a while then places the ball in the green box. Sally returns and wants to play with the ball. The following question is then asked to the children, “where do you think Sally will look for her ball? In the red box or in the green box?” The child has to understand the mental state of Sally and decide that she would look for the ball in the red box and ignore the information that is known to them (i.e. that Anne placed the ball in the green box). The story can be difficult for pre-school children to follow, therefore it is accompanied by real-life dolls and boxes, and questions are asked throughout to ensure that the child is following the sequence of events, however, in the main, children as young as 4 and 5 years old should be able to answer the question correctly. The ability to selectively attend to the information that is important to the context, while ignoring the irrelevant information, is the beginning stages of children’s theory of mind and reflects an important stage of metacognitive development.

I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing

3

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE PROCESSES INVOLVED IN METACOGNITION? As stated above, the main processes involved in metacognition are planning, monitoring, and evaluating (or reviewing). However, a significant aspect of metacognition is metamemory, which refers to the ability to understand memory as a process and be aware of one’s own memory, both in its strengths and in its limitations (Veenman et al., 2006). In other words, it might refer to a person’s ability to assess what demands are being placed on their memory for different tasks and to develop suitable strategies as a result (Bukatko and Daehler 2001). It also includes the skill of monitoring one’s own memory competencies and making judgements as to how to allocate cognitive resources (“Have I remembered everything here?” “How can I make sure that I will remember it all?” “Do I need to reflect on the information a little more?”). It is the development of these skills regarding memory that accounts for the metacognitive process of metamemory. A metacogntive skill that is related to the monitoring process is self-regulation (Azevedo, 2008), which is described as “the capacity to monitor and direct one’s activities to achieve certain goals or meet the demands imposed by others” (Bukatko and Daehler, 2001, p.423). The opposite of self-regulation is impulsivity, an aspect of behaviour that is often seen in children with learning problems, and in young children. Self-regulation means that children will assume greater responsibility for their learning without having to constantly ask their teacher or parent for help. It is the move from dependent learner to independent learner that is a key stage in the development of children and their capacity to use metacognitive strategies. The role of language during self-regulation has been highlighted as especially significant (Vygotsky, 1962). Verbalising (or speaking out loud what one is doing), while carrying out a complex task, is something that can help one to reflect and self-correct, and can be an important metacognitive skill to teach children. The use of the metacognitive strategy of problem verbalisation can have a significantly positive impact on childrens’ learning (Bannert and Mengelkamp, 2008; Bethge, Carlson and Weidl, 1982; Elliott, Lauchlan and Stringer, 1996; Landor, Lauchlan, Carrigan and Kennedy, 2007; Lauchlan, Carrigan and Daly, 2007); indeed even as adults we will often use problem verbalisation to help us when doing something new or complex. Verbalisation encourages monitoring and reflection and helps to draw attention to the key features of a task. Metalinguistic awareness refers to the ability to use knowledge about language. Is a sentence grammatically correct? What are the pragmatic qualities required when communicating? How can I make myself understood clearly? These are questions that would constitute metalinguistic awareness. Research indicates that children do not begin to think about these kinds of questions until around the early school years (Bukatko and Daehler, 2001). It is linked to children’s awareness of their use of language, which clearly reflects another metacognitive skill and one that is essential to learning. Metalinguistic awareness can be demonstrated through the use of jokes or riddles, where the child begins to “play” with their language, perhaps creating funny words or intentionally mislabelling objects (Bukatko and Daehler, 2001). Children’s understanding of metaphor and figurative language reflects their increasing metalinguistic knowledge.

4

Fraser Lauchlan

It is generally felt that a child’s increase in metalinguistic knowledge reflects the improvements that have been made in their thinking skills in general (Bukatko and Daehler, 2001). Research has indicated that metalinguistic awareness is generally higher in bilingual and multilingual children compared to monolinguals (Bialystok, Majumder, and Martin, 2003; Bialystok, Peets and Moreno, 2012; Lauchlan, Parisi and Fadda, 2012). Metacognition can also be used to help reading comprehension, sometimes referred to as metacomprehension. In this context, metacomprehension regards how much knowledge a child has of his/her own reading process, how much they are aware of their own failure to understand something and the resultant ability to come up with appropriate strategies (Currie, 1999). When a child is reading, or indeed when an adult is reading, it is important that they are reviewing what they are reading (or self-monitoring) and making judgements about whether or not they are continuing to understand the passage. If the individual decides that he/ she does not understand the text, then it is important that they take appropriate steps to remedy the situation (e.g. stopping to pause and reflect, looking for clarification from a drawing or picture, using the context to predict what was written or even re-reading the last sentence or two). Of course, most readers will do these things without really noticing it, however, some children do need to be specifically taught how to do this. Teaching metacognitive skills for reading comprehension can be challenging and will largely depend upon the skills of the teacher (Currie, 1999), who must interact with the child, discussing the problem-solving (metacognitive) strategies in a way that will help the child to develop these skills independently. The use of mediated learning (Vygotsky, 1978; Feuerstein, Feuerstein, Rand and Falik, 2002) provides a useful framework in which this can be done. Mediated learning was first discussed by Vygotsky (1978) but extended and elaborated upon by the work of Reuven Feuerstein and colleagues, who developed the theory of mediated learning experience (Feuerstein et al., 1979; 1988; 2002). Essentially, mediated learning is an approach to teaching that involves carefully tailored intervention by a ‘mediator’ in a way that encourages a process in the child or student from being ‘otherregulated’ to being ‘self-regulated’. In other words, the responsibility for learning should be gradually transferred from the ‘mediator’ to the individual learner. This can be done by gradually withdrawing the level of support so that the student progressively assumes greater responsibility for their own learning, adopting the strategies that have been ‘mediated’ to them. It is a process that is often referred to as ‘scaffolding’ (Wood, Bruner and Ross, 1976). For a full discussion of the process of mediation and the theory of mediated learning experience, the reader is referred to Feuerstein et al. (2002).

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF METACOGNITION Various phrases are used to describe metacognition in practice, such as ‘planning to make a plan’, ‘stopping and checking’ and ‘knowing when, what and how to remember’ (Ashman and Conway, 1997, p.51). It is the purpose of this section to review some of the research that has been undertaken on metacognition in various educational settings and also to provide the reader with some practical applications of metacognitive strategies in order to understand how one can try to improve this important skill in students’ learning.

I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing

5

Research has demonstrated the value in promoting metacognition in various educational settings. For example, in a study investigating the use of metacognitive strategies in a chemistry classroom, Thomas and McRobbie (2001) found that students who were previously non-metacognitive in their thinking were able to be trained in how to think more in a metacognitive way, including showing revision of their learning processes. The positive relationship between the use of metacognition, study strategies and academic achievement has been demonstrated by recent research with first year university students (Vrugt and Oort, 2008), and it can be hypothesised that similar results would be obtained with younger students. The influence of metacognition in the development of critical thinking skills in university students has been established in a study involving 240 college students (Magno, 2010). McCormick (2003) offers an excellent review of the literature on the use of metacognition in the classroom and in particular discusses specific intervention studies that have facilitated the use of metacognition demonstrating positive results. Research has also demonstrated the gains made through the use of metacognitive strategies in children with learning disabilities (Wong, 1987), and in children with specific learning problems in mathematics (Lucangeli et al., 1998). Pressley and Gaskins (2006) outlined their research study, which revealed the success of a metacognitive intervention programme across a whole school for students who had problems with reading proficiency. It is the purpose of the remainder of this chapter to outline some ideas that can be tried with individual students or at a whole-class level. The ideas and strategies presented are a culmination of more than 15 years research and practice undertaken by the author in collaboration with colleagues who were (and in some cases, still are) practising educational psychologists (Elliott et al., 1996; Landor et al., 2007; Lauchlan, 1999; 2001; Lauchlan and Carrigan, 2013; Lauchlan et al., 2007; Lauchlan and Elliott, 1997; 2001; Stringer, Elliott and Lauchlan, 1997). Metacognitive questions can be given to students in order to encourage them to ask these questions to themselves when performing a range of different tasks. The questions can be divided into three categories: 1) before starting a task, 2) during the completion of a task, and 3) after completing a task. 1. Before starting a task ● It is important that a student asks some essential metacognitive questions before embarking on a task as it is likely that their answers will help them to undertake the task more efficiently. For example, the student should ask: What do I have to do here? Where will I start? After I start, what will I do next? ● Further questions are required of the student regarding the use of previous knowledge that may help them in the current task, for example, How is this similar to something I already know/have done? What do I know about this already? Will anything I’ve learned before help me with this task? ● The requirements of the task should be considered, for example: do I understand what I need to do here? How much time will I need? Do I know where to get information that will help me? What do I expect to find out? ● Finally, the use of specific strategies should be contemplated before starting: What strategies can I use to complete this task? Is there another way I could do this?

6

Fraser Lauchlan 2. During the task ● While undertaking the task, the student should try to pay attention to their own thinking using process questions: Am I on the right track? How can I spot a mistake if I make one? Does this remind me of previous work that I’ve done? If so, what helped me in that situation? ● Self-regulation is important and the student may ask themselves the following questions to ensure that they are not being impulsive during the task: Am I being careful to stop and think about it? Am I taking my time? Am I reflecting enough? ● Problem-verbalisation can help the student specifically: they should be encouraged to talk their way through the task or problem (but in a way that does not disturb others if working in a group/class context). This will help them to spot errors in their thinking and thus self-correct. 3. After the task ● The most basic metacognitive strategy for students to learn is checking their answer. Thus, they can be encouraged to ask the following, Is my answer correct? Do I need to change it? Do I need to add more? ● Other supplementary questions are just as important in terms of consolidating the learning process and encouraging self-reflection that will help with future tasks, Did I understand everything? Do I need to ask a question? What have I learned by doing this task? How could I do this task better next time? ● The student may also want to consider what they liked and disliked about the task, or whether they found it easy or difficult as this can also help with the reflection and consolidation process, thus, What did I like and dislike about the task? What did I find easy/difficult?

General Classroom Activities to Encourage the Use of Metacognition The metacognitive questions provided above are discussed in the context of helping individual students. However, they can also be used at a whole-class level, perhaps displaying them on a poster in the classroom where all children can read them and be reminded to use them. In this way the teacher can incorporate metacognitive questions into their general teaching routine. Similarly, teachers can encourage the class to check their answers before submitting a piece of work, perhaps incorporating “Checking Time” into the classroom routine. Again, this can be done whole-class, or it could be that children have a set time every day or week where they gather in groups to share what they have done. This could be scheduled after students have completed their planned activities. Another metacognitive strategy that could be tried is to include a set time to reflect on what the children have learned in class, perhaps at the end of the school day. Whole-class discussion can revolve around the question: “What is something new you have learned today?” with every student encouraged to provide a response. This can be done verbally, where each child answers, or alternatively they can be asked to write it down. Another idea is to use “traffic lights” cards where the children would indicate whether they have had a good (green), bad (red), or indifferent day (amber). With younger students or those with difficulties with learning this can also be done through the use of cards with ‘smiley faces’ (good day = happy face, bad day = sad face, indifferent day = straight face).

I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing

7

With older students, the use of a “Reflective Diary” can be a helpful metacognitive strategy to encourage, where the students are asked each day to write their reflections on what they have done in school, and what they have learned. Questions such as: “What did I learn today at school?” or “What did I enjoy today?” can be adapted according to a child’s age and stage. For example, more complex supplementary questions could be asked, e.g. “How will what I learned today help me in the future?”, or “How does what I have learned today relate to real-life contexts?” Another option, if the child is able and wishes to do so, is to complete the Reflective Diary through the use of drawings as a way to communicate their thoughts and feelings about each day. A key aspect of self-regulation is helping students to learn how to set goals independently through planning. Students should be encouraged to set goals related to what they have to study. For younger children, it may be necessary to provide more assistance in this process. Goal setting can involve many things, but may include completing a series of practice questions each day to prepare for a quiz or studying five vocabulary words per night for a test at the end of the week. Children may need help to understand the importance of planning and goal setting. Developing a plan of attack to achieve their goals is necessary, and will help children set reasonable goals within a specific time frame. Examples of planning include completing a study diary or completing parts of a large project for an hour every other day. At this point, students should ask themselves “what is my goal (what do I want to do) and by when?” Planning can be both long term and short term, but ideally, should be done by the student, thereby building independent planning skills; the point of this is to help students to set goals and plan on their own. Teachers may wish to make planning a regular part of the school day. In other words, planning should be a regular classroom activity so students will automatically begin to think about what they want to do and how to carry it out. It can be useful if the planning is scheduled at the same time each day: it can be done in small groups, pairs or individually. With older students, especially with regard to creative project work, they can be encouraged to elaborate their plans in order to extend their ideas. Asking students to give details such as where they want to work, what materials they intend to use, the sequence of their activities and the outcomes they expect to achieve, can do this. As students enter into the habit of writing down and recording their plans, they will begin to get the message that their ideas are valuable. With older children, it is important to encourage them to begin writing down their ideas by themselves. Documentation such as writing, drawing and photography helps children become more conscious of the process and value of planning. They are likely to think through and elaborate on their ideas as they formally record them.

What Parents Can Do to Encourage the Use of Metacognitive Strategies Parents can also help with the process of developing metacognitive strategies in their children. They can encourage their child to use lists for planning and remembering. For example, they can ask the child to design a checklist of five things they need to do in the morning before going to school. Checklists such as these can be useful planning tools, which will help with children’s organisational skills and responsibility for their own learning. Other checklist ideas include planning a bedtime routine or homework routine.

8

Fraser Lauchlan

Before children begin homework, parents can ask them to think about and estimate how long it should take and then check their estimates. This will encourage planning ahead and organisation. Some children may enjoy the challenge of seeing if they can ‘beat the clock’, however, on a cautionary note, it is clearly important that they don’t rush their work as a result. Agreement can be made that the time estimate is based on making no errors. Rewards and treats can be used to make it more enjoyable. Parents can ensure that they provide their child with a weekly planner or homework diary to help with planning and organisation. These are time planning tools that will help children get homework in on time and prioritise activities. Parents can also encourage their child to set goals for the day, week, or month on a regular basis. Helping children set goals is one tangible way of increasing their planning skills. A practical task that can be given by parents to encourage their planning skills is to ask them to plan a family event or outing, i.e. giving them the sole responsibility of planning a family day out (e.g. where to go, how long it will take, what you will need, and what time you will leave). This will encourage children to look ahead by working out steps required to achieve goals.

CONCLUSION The intention of this chapter is to outline the potential benefits that can be gained by encouraging the use of metacognitive strategies by children in the classroom and at home. An outline of the developmental background to metacognition was provided and descriptions given about some of the main metacognitive processes that are discussed in the literature. Research that has been undertaken on the use of metacognition in specific educational settings has been discussed, and practical applications have been provided detailing how teachers (and parents) can implement a metacognitive approach in their classrooms. It is hoped that such strategies will encourage the use of planning, reflection, self-regulation and monitoring by students that, in turn, will help improve their learning. Research detailing the use of metacognition in different educational settings has shown that significant gains can be made in children’s learning. While some may argue that there could be more done in promoting the use of metacognition, there is little doubt that the application of such an approach is becoming increasingly more widespread, if recent research evidence is anything to go by. However, there remains much work to be done, as stated by Veenman et al. (2006), “Teachers are absolutely willing to invest effort in the instruction of metacognition within their lessons, but they need the ‘tools’ for implementing metacognition as an integral part of their lessons, and for making students aware of their metacognitive activities and the utility of those activities” (p.10). It is hoped that this chapter will provide some useful ideas and strategies for students, teachers and parents alike to improve the use of metacognition in their everyday learning contexts.

I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing

9

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank Donna Carrigan for the contribution she has made to some of the ideas presented in this article. Some of the material presented in this article has been reproduced by kind permission of Jessica Kingsley Publishers, taken from Improving Learning Through Dynamic Assessment: A Practical Classroom Resource that will be published in March 2013 and available from www.jkp.com. ISBN: 9781849053730

REFERENCES Ashman, A. F. and Conway, R. N. F. (1997). An introduction to cognitive education: theory and applications. London: Routledge. Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and instructional issues in research on metacognition and self-regulated learning: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 87-95. Bannert, M. and Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning? Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), 39-58. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M. and Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a ‘‘theory of mind’’? Cognition, 21, 37–46. Bethge, H., Carlson, J. and Wiedl, K. H. (1982). The effects of dynamic assessment procedures on Raven Matrices performance, visual search behavior, test anxiety and test orientation. Intelligence, 6, 89-97. Bialystok, E., Majumder, S. and Martin, M. M. (2003). Developing phonological awareness: Is there a bilingual advantage? Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(1), 27-44. Bialystok, E., Peets, K. F. and Moreno, S. (2012). Producing bilinguals through immersion education: Development of metalinguistic awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, Available on CJO2012 doi:10.1017/S0142716412000288. Bukatko, D. and Daehler, M. W. (2001). Child development. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Cole, M. and Cole, S. R. (2001). The development of children. Richmond, UK: Worth Publishers. Currie, L. A. (1999). ‘Mr Homunculus the Reading Detective’: A cognitive approach to improving reading comprehension. Educational and Child Psychology, 16(1), 37-42. Doody, G. A., Gotz, M., Johnstone, E. C., Frith, C. D., and Cunningham Owens, D. G. (1998). Theory of mind and psychoses. Psychological Medicine, 28, 397-405. Elliott, J., Lauchlan, F. and Stringer, P. (1996). Dynamic assessment and its potential for educational psychologists. Part 1: Theory and Practice. Educational Psychology in Practice, 12(3), 24-31. Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R., Falik, L. H., and Rand, Y. (2002). The dynamic assessment of cognitive modifiability. The Learning Propensity Assessment Device: Theory, instruments and techniques. Jerusalem: ICELP Press.

10

Fraser Lauchlan

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y. and Hoffman, M. B. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performance: the Learning Potential Assessment Device. Theory, instruments and techniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y. and Rynders, J. E. (1988). Don’t accept me as I am. New York: Plenum Press. Frith, U. (1989). Autism: Explaining the enigma. Oxford: Blackwell. Landor, M., Lauchlan, F., Carrigan, D., and Kennedy, H. (2007). Feeding back the results of dynamic assessment to the child. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9(4), 346-353. Lauchlan, F. A. (1999). An exploration of dynamic assessment in two different educational settings. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sunderland, School of Education. Lauchlan, F. (2001). Addressing the social, cognitive and emotional needs of children: The case for dynamic assessment. Educational and Child Psychology, 18(4), 4-18. Lauchlan, F. and Carrigan, D. (2013). Improving Learning Through Dynamic Assessment: A Practical Classroom Resource. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Lauchlan, F., Carrigan, D. and Daly, C. (2007). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in dynamic assessment: a case study. Educational Psychology in Scotland, 9(1), 12-18. Lauchlan, F. and Elliott, J. (1997). Using dynamic assessment materials as a tool for providing cognitive intervention to children with complex learning difficulties. Educational and Child Psychology, 14(4), 137-148. Lauchlan, F. and Elliott, J. (2001). The psychological assessment of learning potential. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 647-665. Lauchlan, F., Parisi, M. and Fadda, R. (2012). Bilingualism in Scotland and Sardinia: exploring the cognitive advantages of speaking a ‘minority’ language. International Journal of Bilingualism. DOI: 10.1177/1367006911429622. Lucangeli, D., Cornoldi, C. and Tellarini, M. (1998). Metacognition and learning disabilities in mathematics. Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities, 12, 219-244. Magno, C. (2010). The role of metacognitive skills in developing critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 137-156. McCormick, C. B. (2003). Metacognition and Learning. In: W. M. Reynolds and G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (pp. 79–102). London: Wiley. Pressley, M. and Gaskins, I. W. (2006). Metacognitively competent reading comprehension is constructively responsive reading: how can such reading be developed in students? Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 99-113. Stringer, P., Elliott, J. and Lauchlan, F. (1997). Dynamic assessment and its potential for educational psychologists. Part 2 - the zone of next development? Educational Psychology in Practice, 12(4), 234-239. Thomas, G. P. and McRobbie, C. J. (2001). Using a metaphor for learning to improve students' metacognition in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 222–259. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. and Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3-14. Vrugt, A. and Oort, F. J. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achievement: pathways to achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 123–146.

I Think That I Think I Know What I’m Doing

11

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wong, B. Y. L. (1987). How do the results of metacognitive research impact on the learning disabled individual? Learning Disability Quarterly. 10(3), 189-195 Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S. and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 2

FUTURE DIRECTION OF ATTRIBUTION RETRAINING FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES: A REVIEW Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

ABSTRACT Is it possible to improve an individual’s ability without any direct practise of the topic? Examining the way in which students think about learning and what motivates them to engage in learning material is a fundamental step in the learning process. Consideration has to be given to the effect that low self-esteem can have on the motivation and interest of a child to learn (e.g., Moriarty, Douglas, Punch, and Hattie, 1995). Once a student encounters difficulties in a particular subject area they appear to disengage with academic material on that topic (Kunnen and Steenbeek, 1999). If a student holds the belief that they do not have the capability to achieve in a task, and this belief is continually reinforced by frequent failures, then it is to be expected that the student will reduce the amount of effort they apply to that topic and will reallocate it to a task where positive gains are observed. For example, if a student with reading difficulties concludes that their ability is the main reason limiting their progress in reading, it is likely that they will disengage when reading is the area of study. This is a mechanism to protect their self-esteem, and they will most likely re-direct their focus to an area which does not threaten their self-esteem, such as social interaction. This chapter provides a timely review of the literature on cognitive behavioural approaches and how this can affect students' attributions for success and failure in learning.

Keywords: Attributions, attribution retraining, student motivation, cognitive behavioural, self-esteem

14

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

INTRODUCTION Is it possible to improve an individual’s ability without any direct practice of the topic? Examining the way in which students think about learning and what motivates them to engage in learning material is a fundamental step in the learning process. Consideration has to be given to the effect that low self-esteem can have on the motivation and interest of a child to learn (e.g., Moriarty, et al., 1995). Once a student encounters difficulties in a particular subject area they appear to disengage with academic material on that topic (Kunnen and Steenbeek, 1999). If a student holds the belief that they do not have the capability to achieve in a task, and this belief is continually reinforced by frequent failures, then it is to be expected that the student will reduce the amount of effort they apply to that topic and will reallocate it to a task where positive gains are observed. For example, if a student with reading difficulties concludes that their ability is the main reason limiting their progress in reading, it is likely that they will disengage when reading is the area of study. This is a mechanism to protect their self-esteem, and they will most likely re-direct their focus to an area, which does not threaten their self-esteem, such as social interaction. This can be beneficial for their development in some ways, as to not further impede their self-esteem, however are there alternative adaptive ways to assist students with difficulties to continue engaging with the learning material while preserving self-esteem? This chapter provides a timely review of the literature on cognitive behavioural approaches and how this can affect students' attributions for success and failure in learning. Student attributions are of particular concern for those struggling with learning difficulties in literacy, given that much of the learning material and assessment presented across academic domains requires reading and spelling for the communication of information. The term learning difficulties refers to individuals who are struggling in a specific area of academic pursuit while possessing average or above average cognitive ability (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) and such individuals are becoming increasingly recognised in the Australian educational system. According to a survey conducted in 2003, the percentage of Australian students not achieving the minimum National Benchmarks for Reading are approximately 8 per cent at Grade 3, and approximately 11 per cent at Grades 5 and 7 (Ministerial Council on Education Employment Training and Youth Affairs, 2005). It is a limiting factor across subject domains, as much of the material is in written form, which becomes increasingly apparent as students progress through the education system and literacy expectations are increased at a rate beyond which students with literacy difficulties can maintain. It is estimated that in early high school, children with average reading ability will read at least ten million words during the school year whereas students with reading difficulties will read less than one hundred thousand words during the same year (Lyon, 2003). By any criterion, these outcomes are unacceptable in terms of the educational, psychosocial wellbeing and life opportunities of these individuals. In order to improve the achievement potential and facilitate literacy skills, not only does the underlying source of the difficulty need to be addressed by specialised intervention and support, but the cognitive attribution and motivation of the student must also be recognised as an integral factor in the process (Au, Watkins, and Hattie, 2010; Connor, 1995; Elkins, 2007).

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

15

SELF-EFFICACY AND MOTIVATION An individual’s self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977, 1981, 1982), that is, the manner in which they assess their capabilities to function in a given situation, impacts on the way in which they behave. From the social learning perspective self-efficacy, whether an accurate or erroneous appraisal, develops from the intake of four different types of information. These include: prior performance attainments; vicarious experiences of observing the performances of others (Nicholls, 1978, 1990); verbal persuasion and a social consensus which imparts capability information; and finally, physiological state of arousal (e.g. stress level; Bandura, 1982). Once self-efficacy information has been collected, the material undergoes cognitive appraisal, which is the information that results in an individual’s self-efficacy. Bandura proposes that self-efficacy profoundly affects an individual’s motivation at two stages, being influential on thought patterns prior to and during a situation. In the time leading up to an event people who judge their capabilities as ineffective in coping with the perceived environmental requirements consider their personal deficiencies in an inflated manner. Once experiencing the environment such self-referent misgivings create stress and impair performance by occupying the mind with thoughts of failings and issues that may arise (Bandura, 1982). On the other hand, those with a strong sense of self-efficacy enter a situation with the self-concept that they are able to cope with the challenges that arise and utilise their attention and effort as they see appropriate. Hence, self-efficacy not only affects how an individual thinks leading up to an event but also during the event itself, possibly hindering or facilitating performance. Therefore, the way in which we think about ourselves has the potential to have a profound influence on our behaviour in both adaptive and maladaptive tendencies, and a subsequent effect on motivation to perform the task.

ATTRIBUTIONS FOR LEARNING When performing a task, what is it that forms our internal representation of our abilities? Individuals undertake a causal search for why an outcome occurred, especially when the outcome is negative or somehow unexpected (Graham, 1997). This search leads to the formation of an attribution, that is, the cognitive process of the belief about the cause of an event. Attributions can be seen as the causal explanation of why a particular outcome occurred. Furthermore, causal attributions provide a reason or justification for the outcome (e.g., ‘Why did I fail the spelling test?’ or ‘Why do none of the other kids eat lunch with me?’). For example, attributions can affect academic motivation by influencing the way in which we perceive our academic outcomes: Carr, Borkowski and Maxwell (1991) compared underachieving and typically-achieving students and found the attributional beliefs that they held were fundamental in determining academic success by affecting the way in which they viewed themselves. Furthermore, students with learning difficulties who attributed their failures to an internal, unstable and controllable cause (effort), rather than external, stable, and uncontrollable causes (such as ability) showed improved academic progression (Kistner, Osborne, and Le Verrier, 1988). Thus, individuals make causal attributions about themselves, which, in turn, influence the way in which they view themselves and consequently motivation in that particular area.

16

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

Self-Efficacy Theory Bandura’s self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977, 1981, 1982) did not posit that causal attributions directly influence behaviour, but that they feed into an individual’s self-efficacy and consequently determine parts of our thoughts and behaviours. Self-efficacy has a strong relationship with motivation and persistence, including in the academic realm (Bandura, 1982). An individual’s self-efficacy is said to be largely determined by actual performance accomplishments (past successes and failures) as well as in part by the perceived causes that have contributed to the achievement outcomes. It is these perceived causes that contribute to an individual’s self-efficacy in which attribution theory is identified. Bandura developed a simple theoretical model of how attributions increase and decrease self-efficacy linking increased self-efficacy to successes being perceived as resulting from ability rather than an external influence or aid, and decreased self-efficacy to failures being interpreted as the result of ability rather than an external influence, such as unusual situational circumstances (Bandura, 1977). Other factors that Bandura also considered to be determining factors of selfefficacy development include the perceived outcomes of the task at hand, the amount of perceived effort, and perceived task difficulty. Each factor influences an individual’s selfefficacy as the causal factor of the achievement (or lack of).

Locus, Stability, and Control Next, the pattern of factors which are the primary influences of an individual developing an adaptive or maladaptive attribution style will be taken into consideration. In Weiner’s model of achievement motivation (see reviews in Weiner, 1986, 1995), the attribution that is made for success and failure in learning is the primary mediating factor for the relationship that exists between learning, emotion, and motivation. Weiner (1985, 1995) identified several factors as the dominant causal perceptions in an achievement context. These are locus, or whether a cause is internal or external to the individual; stability, that is, if it is stable or changing over time; and controllability, the amount of control the individual perceives they have over the outcome and whether other factors have influenced the outcome. The manner in which an individual attributes a situation on these three factors leads to various outcomes on the individual’s affect and behaviour. See Figure 1 below for an overview of the general attributional model. As seen in Figure 1, perceived causes of an event, which are influenced by the antecedent conditions, can be categorised into the three causal dimensions of stability, locus, and control. It is these causal dimensions that drive the psychological and behavioural consequences by influencing expectancies for success, self-efficacy beliefs, affects, and actual behaviour. Of note, is that when an individual is said to attribute success to internal and stable factors their motivation to persevere with the task is increased (Weiner, 1985, 1986, 1995). Whereas, when the causal attribution of success is perceived as an external factor, such as a teacher is an ‘easy’ marker, the student’s motivation and perseverance is decreased. Also, on the other side of achievement, when an individual fails a task and attributes perceived internal, stable, and uncontrollable factors as the cause of the failure, such as ‘I failed because I’m not smart’, they are likely to be less motivated to attempt and persevere on the task again as they do not perceive a possible change of outcome other than failure in continuing to attempt the task.

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

17

Adapted from Weiner (1986, 1995). Figure 1. Overview of the general attributional model in Weiner’s achievement motivation theory.

Thus, Weiner’s (1985, 1986, 1995) model posits that attributing success to internal and stable factors (e.g., ability) and not attributing failure to internal and stable factors (e.g., ability) reflects an adaptive attribution style.

Learned Helplessness Once a student has developed a maladaptive attribution style towards a task it is of concern that they will subsequently believe that they are helpless in future encounters with the task at hand. An individual is said to be helpless when they believe they are unable to have an effect on the outcome of a situation and that an unwanted outcome will occur regardless of their behaviour. This attribution style results in the individual engaging less in that task if a negative outcome is apparent (Maier and Seligman, 1976; Peterson, Maier, and Seligman, 1993; Seligman, 1975, 1995). After much work examining the human psyche, psychologist Martin Seligman developed a model of learned helplessness to explain a particular human behaviour. Specifically, when students in an achievement setting are confronted with circumstances where they repeatedly perceive failure, such as not completing a task in an allocated time frame or incorrectly completing work, they begin to see their outcomes as out of their control. Once they feel helpless in controlling the outcome of a task the individual’s motivation decreases as they envision that continuing to engage with the task will not change the outcome. As a large proportion of the mainstream primary curriculum is often literacy based, one group that is often confronted by this issue is students with reading difficulties (Kunnen and Steenbeek, 1999). However, if they believe that an outcome can not be influenced by their own behaviour it leads to the perception of decreased responsibility for reading achievement (Seligman, 2007).

18

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

For example, a student with a Reading Disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) who frequently encounters difficulties whilst learning to read, especially if the condition is not recognised and the educational material provided is above what can be scaffolded, may develop the belief that their reading ability can not be improved with practice and effort. Once this helpless belief develops the individual is less likely to engage in reading as they perceive that effort does not contribute to increased reading ability. Developing a helpless attribution style results in the individual believing their effort is futile as they feel that they do not have control over their own development. Specifically, a major consequence of helplessness in the learning context is lack of motivation (Nolen-Hoeksema, Girgus, and Seligman, 1986; Seligman, 1975). When an individual perceives their efforts to acquire knowledge as fruitless and hence uncontrollable it undermines the motivation to spontaneously engage in an activity in which they feel helpless. For example, a person who has developed the belief that engaging in reading will not improve their reading ability and further their knowledge is less likely to pick up a book to read. A second major consequence is the impact of helplessness on the cognitive processes associated with successful learning. Even when an individual who perceives themselves as helpless and unable to control an outcome succeeds at the task (has the desired outcome) they have difficulty learning that their response has succeeded (Peterson, et al., 1993; Seligman, 1975). For example, a student who has encountered repeated failures in attempts to read and developed a helpless attribution style will not identify a successful outcome of reading and be motivated to continue engaging with reading. They possess a cognitive set in which they perceive themselves as unable to control the outcomes of certain events and reward themselves for positive reading outcomes, leaving them with a diminished level of motivation. Hence, an individual who has developed learned helplessness not only has a decreased level of motivation in comparison to those who have not, but also when they do finally make gains during learning have limited efficiency in attributing recognition.

Expectancies and Goals Researchers Dweck and Reppucci (1973) pioneered the research investigating the effects of low expectancies in task completion setting, a phrase originally coined as ‘learned helplessness’ by Seligman, Maier, and Geer (1968). They examined the theory that an individual develops low expectancies of their behaviour effecting a given learning situation, and as a result, no longer engage in situations. This was highlighted by Dweck and Reppucci’s (1973) contrast of students who attributed successes and failures on a block design task to external or internal and stable or unstable factors. Stability refers to the extent to which the attribution can change over time (unstable) or is relatively permanent (stable). The students who persevered the longest on difficult tasks were those who attributed prolonged failure to effort, rather than ability or external factors. It appears that as early as the 1970’s, research suggested that it is the perceived control which we are able to exert over our successes and failures that affect our motivation to persevere. Attributing a failure to an internal, unstable factor, one that we have the power to change, is the key to perseverance during multiple failures. In order to further understand the link between the motivation patterns of behaviour and the underlying psychological process, Elliott and Dweck (1988) and later Grant and Dweck

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

19

(2003), investigated the effect of goals on motivation. Specifically, two classes of goals were identified: performance goals (in which individuals are concerned with attracting approving judgements of their competence) and learning goals (in which individuals are concerned with increasing their competence) (Dweck, 1986, 1992; Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Interestingly, they found that each class of goal was associated with a different pattern of perseverance. Performance goals (concerned with social perception of ability) were associated with a vulnerability to helplessness in the face of difficulties, that is, avoidance or deteriorating performance when challenged. Whereas, individuals concerned with learning goals (the goal to further competence), when in the same situation as those with performance goals, displayed resilience (Molden and Dweck, 2000) by striving to achieve even when failure was presented. This result may be linked with an individual’s perception of intelligence, that is, whether they consider it to be a dynamic or static entity (Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Grant and Dweck, 2003). Therefore, the goal that one aims to achieve from completing a task and their view of intelligence are factors which affect task perseverance and motivation. An additional factor in understanding perseverance and motivation in learning is the reaction to encountered difficulties. Research conducted by Diener and Dweck (1978, 1980) and later by Cain and Dweck (1995) displayed a stark contrast between the cognitions, affect, and behaviours of individuals classified as having a helpless response to difficulties, as opposed to a mastery-oriented response. Students were characterised as helpless based on their response on the Intellectual Responsibility Scale (Crandall, Katkovsky, and Crandall, 1965) indicating a neglect of the role of effort in their failures (Diener and Dweck, 1978, 1980). Whereas mastery-oriented students were identified based on contrasting responses indicating an emphasis on effort in the face of failure. The studies found that students identified as having a helpless response system of failure reported that their failures were due to inadequate ability (Cain and Dweck, 1995), negative affect (e.g. aversion to the task), and some diverted attention away from task performance by discussing talents in other domains or altering task rules (Diener and Dweck, 1978, 1980). In contrast, mastery-oriented students viewed the tasks which were unsolvable as challenges to be mastered by applying more effort. In essence, the research showed that students with a helpless response to failure, when placed in the same success and failure situation as mastery-oriented students, attributed difficulties as failures and an indication of low ability. Furthermore, Diener and Dweck (1978, 1980) proposed that they believed any future effort would be useless and possibly further document their ‘low’ ability. These results suggest that the attributions an individual holds about personal events of success and failure have a profound effect on their cognitions, affect, and performance (Dweck, 2000). The social cognitive theory of attributions towards learning was later put into practice by manipulating children’s theories of intelligence and by assessing their choice of goal on an upcoming task (Dweck, Tenney and Dinces, 1982, as cited by Dweck and Leggett, 1988). Students were oriented toward a theory of intelligence that is linked to either a performance or learning goal (Dweck and Leggett, 1988) by reading passages that portrayed notable individuals (e.g. Albert Einstein) in the light of each type of intelligence theory. Interestingly, after only such a minor exposure to different ways of viewing intelligence, students who were in the condition linked to learning goals exhibited a learning goal style on a task following the passage reading, and contrastingly students in the performance goals condition adopted that style. Thus indicating that students can be oriented, even if only temporarily, toward a style to approach a task. Once students begin to approach tasks in a learning goal manner, rather than

20

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

a performance goal style, their likelihood of task perseverance is increased (Molden and Dweck, 2000), hence increasing the learning that can occur as a result of engaging in the task itself (Dweck, 2000).

LEARNING DIFFICULTIES AND ACADEMIC SELF-ESTEEM One group of individuals who are vulnerable to adopting a maladaptive attribution style is those with learning difficulties. Specifically, individuals with learning difficulties are often found to have less motivation to persist on a task, which they find difficult in comparison to a student without learning difficulties (Bear, Minke, and Manning, 2002; Beitchman and Young, 1997; Zisimopoulos and Galanaki, 2009). They can be expected to experience less success and receive less positive feedback than do children on average (Kunnen and Steenbeek, 1999). It has been suggested that experiencing less success than the average student results in individuals with learning difficulties developing a self-image of having limited or no control over their achievement outcomes and perceive any effort as a futile attempt (Fuller and McLeod, 1995; Licht, 1983). This can create an unfortunate cycle as the individual’s motivation to engage in the task of difficulty is decreased, less opportunities to learn arise, and their perception of limited control is reinforced, seen as early in the students education as Grade one (Lyon, 2003). When students with learning difficulties are compared to students without learning difficulties, several social and academic differences emerge between the groups indicating that those with difficulties have less motivation, lower perceived control (Grolnick and Ryan, 1990; Short, 1992), maladaptive attributional style, low achievement expectations, low persistence on academic tasks and low academic selfconcept (Montgomery, 1994; Nunez, et al., 2005; Nunez, Gonzalez-Pumariega, and Gonzalez-Pienda, 1995; Tabassam and Grainger, 2002). Furthermore, when students with learning difficulties fail a task they generally consider it a reflection of their ability, or lack thereof (Weisz and Stipek, 1982). This, in turn, can threaten self-esteem (Nunez, et al., 2005; Weisz and Stipek, 1982), leaving students with difficulties in learning with a potential emotional response to failure.

Broad or Narrow? It is this cumulative cycle described above that perpetuates into learned helplessness in individuals with learning difficulties (Halmhuber and Paris, 1993; Onatsu-Arvilommi and Nurmi, 2000). Sorensen and colleagues (2003) suggest with caution from a two-year longitudinal study of students with learning difficulties that they are affected in other psychosocial areas apart from academic progress. However, it appears that the learned helplessness is limited to those areas in which they experience difficulties (Frederisckson and Jacobs, 2001). Examining the general potential differences in academic self-concept for students with learning difficulties and those without, a recent review of the relevant research investigating the area found that 89% of studies showed students with learning difficulties had a more negative academic self-concept (Zeleke, 2004). Whereas when assessing general self-concept, the review found that out of 28 studies only 29% of them showed that normally

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

21

achieving children had significantly higher general self-concept than children with learning difficulties (Zeleke, 2004). These results reflect a particular pattern of self-concept that students with learning difficulties develop, that of a lower self-concept in an academic area but it only affects approximately one third of students in a profound and encompassing negative general selfconcept. Hence, when targeting the motivation and perseverance of students with learning difficulties by examining their attribution, it is likely that other areas of strengths can be used to facilitate their confidence.

Pattern of Attributions Of consideration when examining atttributions of students with and without learning difficulties is the level of control which they perceive they hold in a given task. Licht, Kistner, Ozkaragoz, Shapiro, and Clausen (1985) investigated uncontrollable factors that lead to decreased motivation in students with learning difficulties and found that attributing failure to one’s ability was particularly related to decreased task perseverance. Whereas attributing failure to external factors, such as the teacher or task, was found not to have a negative relationship with persistence even though it is also uncontrollable. This result highlights the strong effect attributing failure to ability can have on an individual’s learning motivation. Furthermore, Frederickson and Jacobs (2001) found that among both students with and without learning difficulties, those with controllable attributions for success and failure had higher reading scores and perceived academic self-efficacy compared to those with uncontrollable attributions. Thus, holding the belief that one has control over the learning outcomes is an integral aspect of task motivation and perseverance. As a result of the research linking academic motivation to self-efficacy through adaptive or maladaptive attributions, Kistner, Osborne, and Le Verrier (1988) tracked the academic performance of students with diagnosed learning difficulties over a two-year period to investigate what attribution constituted the best academic outcome. They assessed student attributions using hypothetical situations for success and failure in the classroom and compared whether students’ attributions were primarily internal or external, effort expended, and ability. Internal attributions included ability, whereas external attributions referred to factors such as task difficulty, and teacher issues. Interestingly, Kistner and colleagues (1988) found that students with learning difficulties who attributed failures to insufficient effort were associated with increased academic progress as well as increased teacher approval of classroom behaviour. Furthermore, the study found that internal attributions, ability and effort for success and failure, were associated with academic progress. This finding suggests that students with learning difficulties who attributed their failures to an internal, unstable and controllable cause (effort), rather than external, stable, and uncontrollable causes (such as ability) showed improved academic progression. Similarly, research examining the difference between academic self-concept found that students with learning difficulties had a lower perceived academic self-concept than those without (Boetsch, Green, and Pennington, 1996; Casey, Levy, Brown, and Brooks-Gunn, 1992). Furthermore, the same pattern of success being attributed to uncontrollable, external factors (such as luck or level of difficulty) and failures being attributed to uncontrollable,

22

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

internal factors (such as ability) was observed by Jacobsen, Lowery and DuCette (1986) among students with learning difficulties. Hence, it is likely, given the relationship between persistence and an individual’s task performance, that students who attributed their failures to insufficient effort were more likely to persist on difficult tasks, as perceived past experience indicates that insufficient effort is associated with failure. In addition, an individual’s attribution that effort is the cause of task failure can be controlled by the individual, hence developing the belief that increasing effort can lead to a positive outcome of task success.

Future Direction As such, students with learning difficulties appear to experience low academic selfesteem which subsequently affects their academic goals and persistence. This poor motivation for academic tasks among students with learning difficulties is an area of intervention with limited research basis in Australia (Elkins, 2007). Yet, it is an area, which is becoming increasingly recognised as an area of much needed attention, especially among students with learning difficulties in the upper years of Australian Primary education (Elkins, 2007; Frederickson, 1998). It has become apparent that merely focusing on the area in which a student experiences difficultly will not increase their perseverance in that area, whereas working on changing their attributions from negative to positive may improve task persistence, practice and progress (Frederickson, 1998). According to a recent review of attribution training programs by Robertson (2000), they can be effective in creating change in a young person’s life by working on the way they are thinking and processing their successes and failures while learning. By suggesting that students are not actually failing because of a lack of ability, they can begin to consider attributing negative educational experiences to other, internal, unstable and controllable factors (such as effort). An intervention aimed at improving the academic self-concept, developed by the manner in which students attribute their successes and failures in learning, demands the attention of those educating students with learning difficulties. Once this issue of motivation and perseverance in children with perceived learning difficulties is addressed the students can then further apply the additional learning strategies that have been taught over the course of their primary education through increased task persistence.

INTERVENTIONS TARGETING ATTRIBUTIONS As discussed above, given that individuals with learning difficulties are likely to have maladaptive attributions that lead to decreased motivation and perseverance, an intervention targeting attribution styles should ensure beneficial outcomes. Several techniques have been attempted over the years including: persuasion techniques (Chapin and Dyck, 1976; Fowler and Peterson, 1981), instructing students in the ‘correct’ way to think about successes and failures in learning; the modelling approach (Borkowski, Weyhing, and Carr, 1988; Schunk, Hanson, and Cox, 1987; Thomas and Pashley, 1982), using attributional retraining alongside a reading program; operant conditioning approach (Andrews and Debus, 1978), using verbal and tactile reinforcers to promote increased effort; and finally the cognitive behavioural

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

23

approach (Berkeley, Mastropieri, and Scruggs, 2011; Haynes Stewart, et al., 2011; Toland and Boyle, 2008), incorporating cognitive and behavioural techniques to bring about metacognitive change. Overall, the various approaches to an attributional intervention have been effective in improving the motivation and perseverance of students with learning difficulties. Specifically, attributing failure on a task to lack of effort was found to be an integral aspect of the retraining process (Forsterling, 1985; Robertson, 2000). Thus, this study indicates that it is possible to improve an individual’s task performance and persistence by focusing on attribution retraining.

COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL BASED PROGRAMS Of particular interest is the effectiveness of the cognitive behavioural approach to attribution retraining. Over the last century, cognitive behaviourism has undergone extensive development and has become an abundantly recognised area of research. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), a technique pioneered by Beck (1976), refers to the analysis and use of techniques focusing on our thoughts, feelings and behaviours. It focuses on the relationship between thoughts, feelings, and behaviours and ways in which we can have control over them. It is based on the idea that a person’s thoughts precede their feelings and behaviours. This concept aligns with attribution theory, in that it is the cognition or the attribution, about an event that affects consequent feelings and behaviours. It is the identification and intervention aimed at this link between an individuals thoughts, feelings and behaviours that has been shown to be so effective in promoting adaptive attribution style among children with learning difficulties (Berkeley, et al., 2011; Toland and Boyle, 2008), as well as mental health concerns such as depression (for example, Klein, Jacobs, and Reinecke, 2007; Seligman, 2007; Verduyn, 2000) and anxiety (for a review see, Ishikawa, Okajima, Matsuoka, and Sakano, 2007). Given the unity of attributional and cognitive-behavioural theory an intervention based on this approach appears to be a compelling option to increase the motivation and perseverance of those with learning difficulties.

Individual versus Group Design Group intervention is a cost- and time-effective method of assisting individuals using CBT (Silverman, et al., 1999). However, its effectiveness cannot simply be extrapolated from the individual interventions with people due to several factors. Conceptually, it is possible that the presence of other people may interfere with the therapist-child rapport and present examples of negative modelling. On the other hand it is possible that the group intervention setting may enhance the therapist-child rapport, participants can also enhance or develop peer relationships as in previous group programs (e.g. Silverman, et al., 1999; Toland and Boyle, 2008), and present examples of positive modelling. Of note, many current evidence- and CBT-based programs advocate the use of groups where peer modelling is a valued commodity integral to the interventions effectiveness (for

24

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

example, Pertersen and Adderley, 2002; Petersen and Lewis, 2004; Seligman, 2007; Stallard, 2002). Therefore, overall the evidence suggests that a group intervention using a cognitivebehavioural approach is an effective way to deliver the instructive material.

Cognitive Behavioural Approaches to Attribution Retraining One such study has applied a cognitive behavioural approach to attribution retraining in the United Kingdom. Toland and Boyle (2008) conducted 12 group sessions over a six-month period at public primary schools with students identified as having difficulties learning and associated poor self-esteem in the classroom. The grade five and six students in groups of five were presented with the link between thoughts, feelings and actions using discussion, modelling, role-play and work sheets. After completing the program students significantly improved on reading ability, yet not spelling ability. Toland and Boyle (2008) suggested that perhaps this result was due to the classroom labour associated with spelling, rather than the occasional spontaneous nature of reading. This study highlighted the effectiveness of a cognitive behavioural approach to attribution retraining in a group intervention program in the senior primary school years. However, the authors noted that the study was time-consuming and required a high commitment from the psychologists in the development and execution of the program.

CONCLUSION In conclusion, there is ample research theorising that attributions are the source of motivation and shape individual self-efficacy, yet it is apparent that a practical and effective program using a cognitive behavioural approach can be successfully implemented in an educational setting. The research discussed throughout this chapter demonstrates that students with difficulties learning in the classroom are particularly vulnerable to developing maladaptive attributions. Students with learning difficulties are susceptible to attributing success to external, stable and uncontrollable sources (such as task difficulty) and failure to internal, stable and uncontrollable sources (such as ability). The introduction of such an attribution retraining program appears to be a viable option for inclusion in an educational setting to increase student motivation to persevere on tasks.

REFERENCES American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Revised 4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. Andrews, G. R. and Debus, R. L. (1978). Persistence and the causal perception of failure: Modifying cognitive attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 154-166. Au, R. C., Watkins, D. A. and Hattie, J. A. (2010). Academic risk factors and deficits of learned hopelessness: A longitudinal study of Hong Kong secondary school students. Educational Psychology, 30(2), 125-138.

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

25

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 71, 191-215. Bandura, A. (1981). Self-referent thought: A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. In: J. H. Flavell and L. Ross (Eds.), Social cognitive development: Frontiers and possible futures (pp. 200-239). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147. Bear, G. G., Minke, K. M. and Manning, M. A. (2002). Self-concept of students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 405-427. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York: International Universities Press. Beitchman, J. H. and Young, A. R. (1997). Learning disorders with a special emphasis on reading disorders: A review of the past 10 years. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36(8), 1020-1032. Berkeley, S., Mastropieri, M. and Scruggs, T. (2011). Reading comprehension strategy instruction and attribution retraining for secondary students with learning and other mild disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(1), 18-32. Boetsch, E. A., Green, P. A. and Pennington, B. F. (1996). Psychosocial correlates of Dyslexia across the life span. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 539-562. Borkowski, J. G., Weyhing, R. S. and Carr, M. (1988). Effects of attributional retraining on strategy-based reading comprehension in learning-disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 46-53. Cain, K. M. and Dweck, C. S. (1995). The relation between motivational patterns and achievement cognitions through the elementary school years. Merrill Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 41(1), 25-52. Carr, M., Borkowski, J. G. and Maxwell, S. E. (1991). Motivational components of underachievement. Developmental Psychology, 27, 108-118. Casey, R., Levy, S. E., Brown, K., and Brooks-Gunn, J. (1992). Impaired emotional health in children with mild reading disability. Developmental and Behavioural Paediatrics 13, 256-260. Chapin, M. and Dyck, D. G. (1976). Persistence in children's reading behavior as a function of N length and attribution retraining. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 511-515. Connor, M. J. (1995). Locus of control. Therapeutic Care and Education, 4(1), 16-26. Crandall, V. C., Katkovsky, W. and Crandall, V. J. (1965). Children's belief in their own control of reinforcement in intellectual academic achievement situations. Child Development, 36, 91-109. Diener, C. I. and Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(5), 451-462. Diener, C. I. and Dweck, C. S. (1980). An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 940-952. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040-1048. Dweck, C. S. (1992). The study of goals in psychology. Psychological Science, 3, 165-167. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York: Taylor and Francis Group.

26

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

Dweck, C. S. and Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273. Dweck, C. S. and Reppucci, N. (1973). Learned helplessness and reinforcement responsibility in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1), 109-116. Elkins, J. (2007). Learning disabilities: Bringing fields and nations together. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(5), 392-399. Elliott, E. S. and Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 5-12. Forsterling, F. (1985). Attributional retraining: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 495512. Fowler, J. W. and Peterson, P. L. (1981). Increasing reading persistence and altering attributional style of learned helpless children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 251-260. Frederickson, N. (1998). Causal judgement and explanation: A practitioner response to Denis Hilton. Educational and Child Psychology, 15(2), 35-42. Frederisckson, N. and Jacobs, S. (2001). Controllability attributions for academic performance and the perceived scholastic competence, global self-worth and achievement of children with dyslexia. School Psychology International, 22(4), 401-416. Fuller, M. and McLeod, P. J. (1995). Judgements of control over a contingently responsive animation by students with and without learning disabilities. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 27(2), 171-186. Graham, S. (1997). Using attribution theory to understand social and academic motivation in African American youth. Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 21 - 34. Grant, H. and Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying Achievement Goals and Their Impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541-553. Grolnick, W. S. and Ryan, R. M. (1990). Self-perceptions, motivation, and adjustment in children with learning disabilities: a multiple group comparison study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 177-184. Halmhuber, N. L. and Paris, S. G. (1993). Perceptions of competence and control and the use of coping strategies by children with disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 16, 93111. Haynes Stewart, T. L., Clifton, R. A., Daniels, L. M., Perry, R. P., Chipperfield, J. G., and Ruthig, J. C. (2011). Attributional retraining: Reducing the likelihood of failure. Social Psychology of Education, 14(1), 75-92. Ishikawa, S.-i., Okajima, I., Matsuoka, H., and Sakano, Y. (2007). Cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 12(4), 164-172. Jacobsen, B., Lowery, P. and DuCette, J. (1986). Attribution of learning disabled children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 59-64. Kistner, J. A., Osborne, M. and Le Verrier, L. (1988). Causal attributions of learning-disabled children: Developmental patterns and relation to academic progress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 82-89. Klein, J. B., Jacobs, R. H. and Reinecke, M. A. (2007). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for adolescent depression: A meta-analytic investigation of changes in effect-size estimates. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(11), 14031413.

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

27

Kunnen, E. and Steenbeek, H. (1999). Differences in problems of motivation in different special groups. Child: Care, Health and Development, 25(6), 429-446. Licht, B. G. (1983). Cognitive-motivational factors that contribute to the achievements of learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 8, 483-490. Licht, B. G., Kistner, J. A., Ozkaragoz, T., Shapiro, S., and Clausen, L. (1985). Causal attributions of learning disabled children: Individual differences and their implications for persistence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 208-216. Lyon, G. R. (2003). Reading disabilities: Why do some children have difficulty learning to read? What can be done about it? Perspectives, 29(2), 1-4. Maier, S. F. and Seligman, M. E. (1976). Learned helplessness: Theory and evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 105(1), 3-46. Ministerial Council on Education Employment Training and Youth Affairs. (2005). National Report on Schooling in Australia 2003, Preliminary paper, National Benchmark results for Reading, Writing and Numeracy, Years 3, 5 and 7. Retrieved July 15, 2011, from http://cms.curriculum.edu.au/anr2003/pdfs/2003. Molden, D. C. and Dweck, C. S. (2000). Meaning and motivation. In: C. Sansone and J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 131-159). San Diego, CA: Academic Press; US. Montgomery, M. S. (1994). Self-concept and children with learning disabilities: Observed child concordance across six context-dependent domains. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 254-262. Moriarty, B., Douglas, G., Punch, K., and Hattie, J. (1995). The importance of self-efficacy as a mediating variable between learning environments and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(1), 73-84. Nicholls, J. G. (1978). The development of the concepts of effort and ability, perception of academic attainment, and the understanding that difficult tasks require more ability. Child Development, 49(3), 800-814. Nicholls, J. G. (1990). What is ability and why are we mindful of it? A developmental perspective. In: R. J. Sternberg and J. J. Kolligian (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 11-40). New Haven: Yale University Press. Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Girgus, J. and Seligman, M. E. (1986). Learned helplessness in children: A longitudinal study of depression, achievement, and explanatory style. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 435-442. Nunez, J. C., Gonzalez-Pienda, J. A., Gonzalez-Pumariega, S., Roces, C., Alvarez, L., Gonzalez, P., et al. (2005). Subgroups of Attributional Profiles in Students with Learning Difficulties and Their Relation to Self-Concept and Academic Goals. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(2), 86-97. Nunez, J. C., Gonzalez-Pumariega, S. and Gonzalez-Pienda, J. A. (1995). Self-concept in children with and without learning disabilities. Psicothema, 7, 587-604. Onatsu-Arvilommi, T. and Nurmi, J.-E. (2000). The role of task-avoidant and task-focused behaviors in the development of reading and mathematical skills during the first school year: A cross-lagged longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 478491. Pertersen, L. and Adderley, A. (2002). Social Skills Training: Primary Years of Schooling Ages 8-12. Camberwell, Vic: ACER Press.

28

Jemima Ellen Koles and Christopher Boyle

Petersen, L. and Lewis, P. (2004). Social skills training : supplement for middle years of schooling ages 12-15. Adelaide: ACER Press. Peterson, C., Maier, S. and Seligman, M. E. (1993). Learned Helplessness: A Theory for the Age of Personal Control. New York: Oxford University Press. Robertson, J. S. (2000). Is attribution training a worthwhile classroom intervention for K-12 students with learning difficulties? Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 111-134. Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R. and Cox, P. D. (1987). Peer-model attributes and children’s achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 54-61. Seligman, M. E. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco: Freeman. Seligman, M. E. (1995). The Optimistic Child (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins. Seligman, M. E. (2007). The Optimistic Child: A Proven Program to Safeguard Children Against Depression and Build Lifelong Resilience. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Seligman, M. E., Maier, S. F. and Geer, J. H. (1968). Alleviation of learned helplessness in the dog. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 73, 256-262. Seligman, M. E. P. (2007). The Optomistic Child: A Proven Program to Safeguard Children Against Depression and Build Lifelong Resilience. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Short, E. J. (1992). Cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and affective differences among normally achieving, learning-disabled, and developmentally handicapped students: How much do they affect school achievement?. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21(3), 229-239. Silverman, W. K., Kurtines, W. M., Ginsburg, G. S., Weems, C. F., Lumplin, P. W., and Carmichael, D. H. (1999). Treating anxiety disorders in children with group cognitive behaviour therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 995-1003. Sorensen, L. G., Forbes, P. W., Bernstein, J. H., Weiler, M. D., Mitchell, W. M., and Waber, D. P. (2003). Psychosocial adjustment over a two–year period in children referred for learning problems: Risk, resilience, and adaptation. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(1), 10-24. Stallard, P. (2002). Think Good Feel Good. A Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Workbook for Children and Young People. London: John Wiley. Tabassam, W. and Grainger, J. (2002). Self-concept, attributional style and self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Learning Disability Quarterly 25(2), 141-152. Thomas, A. and Pashley, B. (1982). Effects of classroom training on LD students' task persistence and attributions. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5(2), 133-144. Toland, J. and Boyle, C. (2008). Applying cognitive behavioural methods to retrain children's attributions for success and failure in learning. School Psychology International, 29(3), 286-302. Verduyn, C. (2000). Cognitive behaviour therapy in childhood depression. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 5(4), 176-180. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: SpringerVerlag. Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: Guilford.

Future Direction of Attribution Retraining …

29

Weisz, J. R. and Stipek, D. J. (1982). Competence, contingency, and the development of perceived control. Human Development, 25(4), 250-281. Zeleke, S. (2004). Self-concepts of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers: A review. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19(2), 145170. Zisimopoulos, D. A. and Galanaki, E. P. (2009). Academic intrinsic motivation and perceived academic competence in Greek elementary students with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 24(1), 33-43.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 3

THE 21ST CENTURY LAW STUDENT: THE LECTURE ROOM OR THE MOBILE PHONE? Tom Serby Anglia Law School, Cambridge, UK

ABSTRACT This chapter describes the replacement of “face to face” lectures with recorded lectures (referred to below as “i-lectures” or “screencast lectures” and often referred to by others as “podcasts”[1]) designed to be listened to online by law students on a professional postgraduate programme in a British University, where the mode of study was Part Time. Other online elements introduced into this Part Time law course were the use of an online Discussion Board where students post comments as part of an online debate, and online Multiple Choice Questions (“MCQs”) attempted by students after listening to an i-lecture. Through the use of questionnaires (before and after the introduction of the online teaching methods) research was undertaken into students’ opinions on online or “blended” learning and whether there was a divergence of opinion between Full Time and Part Time students. Additional research was made into the assessment results of the two cohorts (Part and Full Time) after the introduction of online teaching. A subsidiary aspect of the research was an empirical analysis of the efficacy of MCQs as an assessment method. The chapter briefly describes the hurdles that exist in terms of cost and time in the switch to i-learning and enumerates the pedagogical benefits of blended learning, in particular looking at the concept of so-called “just in time teaching”[2] associated with the use of formative MCQs. Prior to commencing the project I was aware of the countervailing views on i-lectures. Some research has been critical of the pedagogic benefits of i-lectures on account of the lessening of physical interactivity between students and staff [3] (using some of the timetable time released by the phasing out of face to face lectures, we set up a forum for our Part Time students to interact with local trainee solicitors thereby reducing any such isolation-induced anxiety that may have existed [4]). A number of authors have spoken against lengthy i-lectures (ie those over twenty minutes, the i-lectures I recorded were on average 40 minutes) [5]. Some writers have even suggested that the use of internet technology can restrict access 

(MA Cantab), Solicitor Advocate, Senior Lecturer, Anglia Law School , Cambridge.

32

Tom Serby to the learning materials to students who are from non-technical backgrounds [6]. Another criticism of blended learning techniques has been that working at home is not conducive to study as there will be too many distractions [7]. I wished to test some of these hypotheses during the project this chapter describes.

INTRODUCTION The postgraduate programme on which the research is based is the professional qualification, the Legal Practice Course (“LPC”) the passing of which is a prerequisite for training as a solicitor in England and Wales. Prior to the research project the University offered, on different campuses, both a one year Full Time LPC and a Part Time LPC (two years of study) but there was no online learning element to either. Taking the premise that students enrol on Part Time courses because they prefer to study flexibly [8] I perceived the lack of any distance/blended learning element in the University’s Part Time postgraduate professional law programme as a major weakness. There was no existing experience of i-lectures within the University’s Law School on which I could draw when implementing the project, and I had no previous experience myself of any aspect of online learning. Wilson cites three attributes of the lecturer as conditioning the success of online material: control over the technology, teaching style and attitude towards technology [9]. I analyse below the results and feedback from the students in assessing whether the switch to online learning was a success. The programme was not exclusively online by distance learning as the students also attended a two hour interactive workshop after every i-lecture. The same programme was concurrently taught at a different campus to a cohort of Full Time students who continued to attend face to face lectures, and where the other online features of the Part Time programme were predominantly absent. The decision to introduce i-learning into the Part Time course was mine but I did receive institutional support. Lack of leadership in the Higher Education sector (whether by Budget holders, Deans or Senior Management Boards) is potentially fatal to innovative expansion of e-learning [10]. The LPC online learning programme for Part Time students described in this chapter was part of a formal University Learning and Teaching project. Prior to the introduction of i-lectures the Part Time LPC students’ one day of study per week on campus was an eight hour day. This was required to fit in the interactive workshops and the face to face lectures into the one day. Higher level interactivity has been described by Carrington and Green as “proper integration of the results of the student pre-class activity into the face-to-face discussion” [11]. Collaboration between students heightens interactivity, and pre-class activity enables students to discuss collaboratively. Squeezing teaching into an eight hour day militated against productive interactivity and was compounded by the fact that, as the major LPC provider in the eastern region of England, many students would travel long distances to attend on campus. In all I recorded 23 screencast i-lectures in the Business Law and Practice (“BLP”) module of the LPC to replace the 23 one hour face to face lectures. These new MP4 compatible i-lectures or screencasts were loaded onto the University’s online Virtual Learning Environment (“VLE”) so that the lectures were accessible online at a time and place of the student’s choice. The only requirement was that students listen to the i-lecture (and

The 21st Century Law Student

33

attempt the associated online MCQs, see below) before the interactive face to face two hour workshop which follows every i-lecture. Full Time LPC students, on the University’s other campus, continued to study through attendance at face to face lectures (about one third of contact hours) as well as the interactive Workshops (two thirds of overall contact hours). The Full Time students were only given access to the BLP i-lectures on the University’s VLE about a month after their lecture and after they had attended the workshop/tutorial relating to the lecture. Therefore for our Full Time students the i-lectures were available only for the purposes of revision and watching them was a purely optional exercise. Interestingly there was no dropoff in attendance at lectures from these Full Time students (a common fear among teachers contemplating placing i-lectures online). This confirms previous studies such as the extensive research of Bird et al into i-lectures as a supplement to live lectures [12]. Once loaded onto the VLE the i-lectures remain there so the students can “listen again” more than once, and many (Full Time and Part Time) chose to do so in the run-up to their assessments. The cost of the technology required for the project is absolutely minimal, simply a licence for one of the appropriate recording software programmes that now exist on the market (of which there are many eg Audacity, Camtasia, snapzpro) [13]. Powerpoint slides were created to accompany the voice recording along with links to external websites, such as UK Companies House online, so that students could access primary materials at the direction of the lecturer (such as forms filed by businesses at Companies House) as they listened to the lecture. As Wagstaff has observed: “simply recording the audio component of a weekly lecture can potentially result in an experience for the listener that is boring, disconnected and difficult to follow” [14].

BLENDED LEARNING The introduction of the online features into the Part Time course is an example of “blended learning” (marrying online learning to traditional classroom teaching) of which there has been a growth in recent years across a range of Higher Education programmes. Blended learning has been described as: “a systematic mix of eLearning and learning in faceto-face contexts, in which coherence across the two contexts from a student perspective is achieved by focusing on the same intended learning outcomes” [15]. As pointed out by Garrison and Kanuka: “There is considerable intuitive appeal to the concept of integrating the strengths of synchronous (face-to-face) and asynchronous …. learning activities. At the same time, there is considerable complexity in its implementation with the challenge of virtually limitless design possibilities and applicability to so many contexts” [16]. There is of course much more to blended learning than using a VLE as an electronic depository of lecture notes. Maharg has led the way in the field of legal education in pioneering online transactional learning [17]. Previous research I conducted looked at the use of online transactional learning to study the law of probate [18]. As Mikat, Martinez and Jorstad point out, podcasts (a generic term which includes ilectures ) enable students to (i) “listen again”; (ii) pause for further reading or reflection during the course of a lecture; and (iii) choose a time to learn that is most beneficial to them rather than to a central timetable [19] and they (podcasts) ‘are versatile, reusable, interesting

34

Tom Serby

and stimulating to the new generation of technology-savvy student’. The traditional lecture, unlike the i-lecture, is of course only available to students to attend once. Many learners prefer auditory learning to reading. The ability to relisten, and to listen at a time and place of the listener’s choice, are unique features of the i-lecture. The i-lectures were supplemented by online debate on a VLE Discussion Board, which as McCall has commented [20] is an “asynchronous medium [which] allows students time to develop their responses, come back to a thread with new thoughts when convenient and allows opportunities for contributions from less dominating types of students who might be reluctant to speak up in class” [21]. Aside from the pedagogical benefits of blended learning techniques, there are other considerations; as Ribiero has pointed out, online teaching materials can also easily be adapted for use as corporate training sessions, providing a commercial spin-off for e-learning to the Higher Education sector [22]. Increasing online learning can mean a saving in both staff and student travel time.

THE DIFFERING DEMANDS OF FULL TIME AND PART TIME STUDENTS The move towards a greater element of online learning for Part Time students was partly predicated on an increased demand for flexible learning by a student population who have to balance studies with “income generation” which is only partly linked to the requirement of today’s student population to earn while studying. Obtaining work experience in a legal environment increases law students’ chances of obtaining employment in their chosen field, but without flexible blended learning, time dedicated to such employment might impede study. Empirical research into the University’s LPC student body revealed that a far higher percentage of Part Time than Full Time LPC students combined their LPC studies with paid work in a legal environment. The demographic differences between Full and Part Time students in Higher Education generally has been well documented as has the preference of older students for more interactive teaching methods [23]. My research showed that a significantly higher percentage of LPC Full Time students are recent graduates (about ninety percent), with little or no significant work experience, prepared to devote most of their time during their year studying the LPC to the course. Conversely a higher proportion of Part Time LPC students (over fifty percent) have had significant work experience and are actually working whilst studying.

STUDENT OPINION ON FLEXIBLE BLENDED LEARNING Prior to introducing the i-learning onto the Part Time course student surveys were undertaken. Student evaluations on their own should not inform changes to teaching practices. The framing of questions so as to lead to positive answers has been described as a process of “seduction” and student opinion as to their preferred learning style may not reflect what is pedagogically best [24]. However the research I carried out through the medium of Lickert style questionnaires asking students their opinion on blended learning was valuable. In accordance with the University’s Research Ethics policy students were asked to give their

The 21st Century Law Student

35

informed consent to the use of the results of the surveys on an anonymous basis. One of the things I was looking for was empirical evidence of any discrepancy between the views of Part Time and Full Time students on i-learning. The survey of the part Time students was repeated again after i-learning was introduced. Broadly the results supported the existing research into the different expectations of, and attitudes to, “blended learning” of Full Time (characterised as on-campus) as opposed to Part Time (off-campus) students, done by Rob van Zanten of the University of Adelaide and others [25]. In the Academic Year before the introduction of the i-learning I polled the existing Part Time LPC students in regard to the prospective replacement of face to face lectures with screencast i-lectures, by asking the following questions: Currently on the Part Time course the students have an eight hour day. It may be possible by developing remote learning for lectures (LGSs) to reduce the requirement for physical attendance on campus to 6 hours. I would welcome this.

Strongly agree

Agree

Indifferent

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

The advantages of remote learning are outweighed by the disadvantage, namely that there would be no facility in remote learning to question the Tutor during the LGS session if I did not understand something clearly. Consequently I would prefer it if all LGSs continued to be delivered face to face.

Strongly agree

Agree

Indifferent

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

All 25 of the students took part in the survey. The result of the survey was that all but two (over 92%) of the Part Time students endorsed the introduction of screencast i-lectures in place of face to face lectures on campus, by voting Strongly Agree or Agree to the first question and Strongly Disagree or Disagree to the second. The same questionnaire was put to our forty Full Time LPC students all of whom, as referred to above, studied on a different campus, attending four days rather than one day a week, with never more than five hours contact time per day. The response to the same survey questions was more evenly split among our Full Time students with a small majority against replacement of face to face lectures with i-lectures. In the following academic year, I did a third survey of Part Time students. This cohort had experienced both i-lectures (in Business law) and face to face lectures (in their other first year subjects). The result of this poll, was almost identical to the result of the poll of the previous cohort of Part Time students, with over 90% of Part Time students wanting screencast i-lectures in all modules, not just the Business law module, in place of face to face lectures.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONING TO REINFORCE I-LECTURES The major criticism (predominantly from Full Time students) levelled at i-lectures in the “free comment” section of the student questionnaire reflected student concern that there

36

Tom Serby

would be no means of “checking for understanding” of the i-lectures with the lecturer not being physically present. A typical comment was: “I’ve paid a lot of money for this course and I expect the lecturer to be there to answer my questions”.

There was also concern expressed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (the professional body which oversees LPC courses) as to the means for checking whether students had actually engaged in the i-lectures at all, since there would be no register taken of student attendance. Both these concerns can be addressed by the use of MCQs. To accompany each i-lecture I drafted 23 sets of Multiple Choice Questions. The introduction of online MCQs was primarily intended to make it easier to align constructively the learning outcomes of the ilectures and the interactive face to face workshops which followed, and to encourage reflective and deeper learning of the i-lectures. The MCQs were made available on the VLE at the same time as the i-lecture. Each MCQ comprised 4 statements and the students had to choose which ONE of the statements was correct in relation to a given statement. The University’s VLE automatically generates a score in relation to the success rate of the students (individually and collectively) in respect of the MCQs they attempted. This enabled me to prepare before the Tutorial/Workshop to expand on areas where students had demonstrated an incomplete understanding (described by Novak et al as “just in time teaching” [26]). The further dialogical feedback made possible during workshop tutorials was the greatest pedagogic benefit of the MCQs. I was also able to gauge which students were struggling generally with the course. An important feature of online MCQs is that they report back to students. Such was the motivational nature of the MCQs that the takeup by Part Time students was nearly 100 percent. In fact the peer discussions I facilitated during Workshops about the MCQs meant that students overwhelmingly appreciated the benefits for them of attempting the MCQs on time so as not to miss out on these discussions. The advantages of MCQs are obvious both from the perspective of efficiency in marking and as Johnstone and Ambusaidi put it, “having a compulsory MCQ section allows efficient testing across a greater range of the syllabus” [27]. It is commonly acknowledged that online computer-assisted assessment (CAA) can dramatically reduce the time wasted by the teacher on formative and summative testing. The biggest criticism of MCQs in terms of pedagogy is that students do not have to engage in a positive formulation of their ideas, since they have only to choose from a number of pre-prepared answers offered to them. Another argument marshalled against MCQs is that they are “too easy”, sometimes leading to scores in excess of the score achieved in longer style written essay answers, and of course they have been criticised as rewarding guessing, the “lucky monkey” argument. The latter problem can be vitiated by awarding a negative mark for the wrong answer and the results of my research (see below) showed that students DID NOT score more highly when assessed by MCQs. In short MCQs are often disparaged as a means of testing knowledge, especially so in a liberal arts degree such as Law, but not all legal educators concur with this view [28]. Some researchers, for example Johnstone and Ambusaidi, have maintained that MCQs are able to test understanding at a higher cognitive level [29]. There are numerous guides to writing effective MCQs [30], the overarching focus being on the quality of the “distracter” questions, which should not be too obviously wrong.

The 21st Century Law Student

37

The students embraced the MCQs with relish, and commented that they appreciated the fact that they received immediate automatically generated feedback on their answer. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick in their research into the pedagogical efficacy of MCQs discuss the feedback given to students in relation to MCQ assessment and focus on the issue of learner self-regulation through MCQ testing [31]. Nicol and Macfarlane’s seven principles of good feedback can be distilled into three overarching principles or features, all three of which are present in the format of MCQ testing I used. First, the testing is “open book” and as there is no time limit imposed on the students they are encouraged to reflect on the question and read around the subject to improve their chance of choosing the right answer. Secondly, the use of MCQs in conjunction with i-lectures is directly tied to a classroom activity in that the workshop/tutorial following on from the i-lecture allows the teacher to discuss with the students their MCQ experience and the group to discuss together the answers. Thirdly, the MCQs are repeatable either immediately after the student has received automatic notification that they have picked the wrong answer, or indeed later in the year, for example as a revision tool. By this means student confidence in their understanding of the materials increased as, assuming regular attendance at workshops, where I engaged with students in discussion of the MCQs and the learning objectives upon which they are based, students’ MCQ scores increased as they redid the MCQs throughout the year, building up to their summative assessment which is at the end of the course. This motivational aspect of MCQs is a powerful tool in inculcating in students an understanding of how they are “progressing” their understanding and what the learning outcomes of the course are. Another way of characterising the three phases of feedback present at different stages of the MCQ cycle is self; peer and tutor. What we have not done on the project, yet, is to take the student reflection via MCQs to the next level of higher level or meta-learning through MCQs where the students construct their own MCQs where the instructor perspective no longer has primacy.

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS, INCLUDING FORMATIVE MCQS I undertook some research into students’ pass rates on the formative online MCQs compared to their pass rates in the summative assessments at the end of the course. First, I analysed the results of the Full Time students for whom the MCQs (like the i-lectures) were not compulsory. These students were aware that the MCQs were available online and that they were self-marking, were not compulsory, and did not count as a form of continuous assessment. I was interested in two issues: the student’s final mark in their summative and their success rate in the formative MCQs they attempted; ii. whether undertaking formative MCQs improved a student’s prospect in the summative assessment (ie the relationship between the student’s final exam mark and how many of the formative online MCQs they attempted). i.

38

Tom Serby

(i) In the first year of i-lectures there were 40 students registered on the Full Time LPC course, but as the MCQs were not compulsory only 26 students attempted some of the MCQs. Of these, 16 students attempted half or more of the 23 sets of MCQs (the minimum reliable sample for the purposes of this analysis). Of these students, four attained an aggregate score on the MCQs of more than 70%, five scored between 60 and 70%, four scored between 50 and 60% and three scored less than 50%. In every case save one, these students scored within these margins in their (non MCQ) summative assessment. Each student’s pass rate on the MCQs proved to be a very reliable indicator of the student’s exam prospects and their overall understanding of the learning outcomes of the Business Law module. (ii) On the other hand, there was no correlation between the number of MCQs attempted by students and their final exam grade. Of the 16 Full Time students who attempted more than half of the MCQ exercises, roughly equal numbers attained a Fail, Pass, Merit or Distinction in the summative assessment (with slightly higher proportions in the latter categories). A significant proportion of students (over thirty percent) attaining a Merit or Distinction in their summative assessment did not attempt any of the MCQs. The other aspect of my empirical research into the students’ assessment results was: iii. a comparison of the summative assessment results of the Part Time and Full Time students in Business Law. The overall pass rate for the Part Time students in the summative assessment was higher by 15% than the pass rate of the Full Time students. The results of the assessments in the other LPC subjects (where there was no element of i-learning) showed that the only subject that the Part Time students significantly outperformed the Full Time students in was Business Law, the only subject where i-lectures (and the other associated i-learning described above) had replaced face to face lectures.

CONCLUSION Previous research has elicited evidence for the obtaining of higher grades by students with a substantial degree of e-learning in their syllabus [32]. Research into the performance in the summative Business Law assessment of the Full Time and Part Time students in the first year of the i-lecture project supports that theory, although as a statistical sample (fifty four students) the findings are far from conclusive on account of the sample’s size. As a result of the success of this project and positive student feedback colleagues within the Law School have lost some of their inhibitions towards technology and more online learning methods have been introduced to a range of programmes in the Law School. All modules on the University’s Part Time LPC have now replaced face to face lectures with ilectures and online MCQs. Change engenders change and “podcasts” have now been extended to other areas, such as feedback given on student assessments (which has been extremely well received by students). Much of the current academic research and orthodoxy [33] suggests that the role of the ilecture is to supplement but not to replace the traditional face to face lecture and that students do not want to abandon the classroom for the MP4 player, but appreciate the i-lecture as a

The 21st Century Law Student

39

supplementary resource only. My research suggests that for a significant part of the student body (Part Time students) that is not so. Our Part Time students actively welcome a higher degree of blended online learning in the LPC programme, and their academic attainments have actually improved after face to face lectures were phased out in favour of i-lectures. As has been evidenced by previous research, greater use of MCQs (an online accompaniment to the i-lectures) as a form of feedback to students gives them a greater idea as to how they are progressing, and motivates students to revisit the learning materials to check for understanding in areas where they have not succeeded first time in the MCQs [34]. My research also indicated that the correlation in results between the online formative MCQs and summative assessments was significantly close. Before I commenced the research project I strongly suspected that Part Time students would be more receptive to flexible or i-learning than Full Time students (I was proved right by the results of the student feedback) and that the performance of the Part Time students in assessments (which are the same for both cohorts) would be no worse than Full Time student results (Part Time students actually outperformed their Full Time peers but only in the module where there was greater i-learning). I also believed that colleagues who run other modules in the LPC at the University would look at the results of the project and want to place the i-learning elements in their own modules (they did; there was a strong student demand for it). I also believed that following the introduction of flexible blended learning at one campus, applications would rise in proportion to applications to enroll on the Full Time course at the other campus (right again). For Part Time law students, the majority of whom wish to supplement their academic learning with relevant work experience, the benefits of the lecture listened to on the mobile phone, outweigh the attractions of the traditional lecture theatre.

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3]

[4]

[5]

[6] [7]

For a fuller discussion of what technically constitutes a podcast see the article by D Watkins “Podcasting: a lawyer’s tale” in The Law Teacher 2010 vol 44(2) p 169. G. Novak, E. Patterson, A.Gavrin and W. Christian, (1999) Just-in-time-teaching: blending active learning with web technology Prentice Hall. D.Garrison and H. Kanuka, (2004) “Blended Learning: Uncovering its Transformative Potential in Higher Education” 7 (2) The Internet and Higher Education 95-105, at p. 98. M. Lee and A. Chan, (2007) “Reducing the effects of isolation and promoting inclusivity for distance learners through podcasting” Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(1), pp 85- 104. A Chan, M Lee and C McLoughlin (2006) Everyone’s learning with podcasting: A Charles Sturt University experience. Who’s learning? Whose technology? Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2006. B O'Connell, (2002). A poor grade for eLearning. Workforce, 81(7) p. 15. G Shabha, (2000). Virtual universities in the third millennium: An assessment of the implications of teleworking on university buildings and space planning. Facilities, 18(5), pp 235-244.

40 [8] [9] [10]

[11]

[12] [13] [14]

[15] [16] [17] [18]

[19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

[26] [27]

[28] [29]

Tom Serby J Galusha, (1997)‘Barriers to learning in distance education’ Interpersonal Computing and Technology Journal 5 (3-4) p 6. J. Wilson, (2001) “Lessons of a Virtual Timetable,:Education” The Economist, 17 February, p.1. J. Mapuva and L. Muyengwa, (2009) “Conquering the Barriers to Learning in Higher Education Through e-Learning”, International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education , Volume 21, Number 2, pp 221-227. A Carrington and I Green (2007) Just in time teaching revisited: using e-assessment and rapid e-learning to empower face to face teaching; proceedings Ascilite Singapore 2007. T Bird et al (2006) “Using Enhanced and Video Podcasts of Lecture Recordings to Support Student Learning, Implementation and Evaluation” University of Bangor. For a fuller discussion of the technology available for podcasts see the article by D Watkins “Podcasting: a lawyer’s tale” in The Law Teacher 2010 vol 44(2) p 169. P. Wagstaff, (2007). Educational podcasting: Fad or future? Proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference, Dunedin December 2007. R Ellis and R Calvo (2004) “Learning through Discussions in Blended Environments” 40 (1) Educational Media International 263-74 at p. 268. D Garrison and H Kanuka (2004) “Blended learning: Uncovering its Transformative Potential in Higher Education” 7(2) The Internet and Higher Education 95-105 at p. 98. P Maharg, (2010) Simulation and the affective domain; ALT conference Cambridge. T Serby, (2011) Willing Suspension of disbelief: A study in online learning through simulation, and its potential for deeper learning in higher Education, Liverpool Law Rev 32 pp 181–195. R. Mikat, R. Martinez and J. Jorstad J, (2007) “Podcasting for your class” The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 78(5), pp 14-16. I McCall, (2010) “Online enhanced problem-based learning: assessing a blended learning framework” The Law Teacher, Vol 4 Number 1, pp 42-58. I McCall, Op cit p 58. T. Ribiero, (2002) “From a distance: Look at distance learning’s increased following”, Education, 152(9), p. 85. B. Merrill (2001) “Learning and Teaching in Universities: Perspectives from Adult Learners and Lecturers”, Teaching in Higher Education 6 pp 5-18. D. Bligh (1998) What’s the use of lectures? Exeter: Intellect p 181 R.Van Zanten, (2008)“The value of lecture podcasting for distance and on-campus students” Available at: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/ vanzanten (accessed 21 October 2011). Novak et al. op cit. E Higgins and L Tatham, (2003) Exploring the potential of Multiple Choice Questions in Assessment Learning and Teaching in Action, Manchester Metropolitan University Vol 2 Issue 1. P Alldridge, (1997) Multiple Choice Examination in Law 21 Law Teacher 167. A Johnstone and A Ambusaidi, (2000) Fixed response: what are we testing? Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1(3), 323–328.

The 21st Century Law Student

41

[30] See for example J. Bull and C. McKenna, (2004) Blueprint for computer-assisted assessment, (London: RoutledgeFalmer). [31] D. Nicol and D. Macfarlane-Dick, (2006) “Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice”, Studies in Higher Education 31(2), pp 198-218. [32] D. Holley, (2002) “Which room is the virtual session in please?”, Education and Training, 44(3), pp. 112-121. [33] D Watkins (2010) “Podcasting: a lawyer’s tale” The Law Teacher vol 44 (2) pp 169180. [34] D. Nicol, (2006) “Increasing success in first year courses: assessment re-design, selfregulation and learning technologies” in L.Markauskaite, P. Goodyear and P. Reiman (eds), Proceedings of the 23rd ASCILITE Conference: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology? (Sydney, Sydney University Press).

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 4

THE CREATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERACTIVE OPPORTUNITIES TO PROMOTE LEARNING BETWEEN LECTURES Jacqueline Carnegie University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

ABSTRACT The large student enrolments and content-dense curricula associated with many undergraduate programs make it difficult for instructors to interact individually with students during lectures to ensure that essential cognitive links are being made and that the course content is fully understood. However, the existence of universal student access to course web sites via the Internet allows the learning environment to be extended well beyond the classroom by providing a wealth of opportunities for interactive learning as well as comprehensive self-testing. This chapter will begin with an exploration of the effective use of online discussion boards and self-testing tools associated with commercially-available course web site platforms such as BlackboardR and the open source course management system, MoodleR. The ability of a discussion forum to promote social constructivism by creating a virtual classroom in which students can ask questions in a risk-free environment, mentor one another, and even work actively together in small groups to explore new concepts and complete assignments will be described. The advantages of instantaneous feedback associated with various online selftesting tools will be recognized. Guiding principles and methods for the creation of animations to support e-learning will be briefly reviewed as will the ability of podcasts to allow students to review lecture highlights anywhere and at any time. Finally, students will be acknowledged as tremendous assets who can recognize learning challenges and assist in developing creative approaches to tackling these hurdles.

Keywords: E-learning, social constructivism, discussion forum, self-testing, active learning

44

Jacqueline Carnegie

INTRODUCTION Key challenges faced by undergraduate students include enrolment within a class that may number in the hundreds and the need to assimilate and understand a content-dense curriculum delivered quickly via a finite number of face-to-face hours with the instructor. While reports have shown that many students continue to place significant value on traditional teacher-centered educational approaches (Ipsos, 2007; Saunders and Gale, 2011), the instructor who provides a series of didactic lectures in front of a student-filled amphitheatre has limited opportunity to become acquainted with individual class members and even less chance of determining if each student is making the desired cognitive links before key summative exams are written. As a result, these young adult learners must assume significant responsibility for their educational success. Instructors should share in that responsibility by facilitating self-directed learning through the provision of virtual opportunities for collaborative exploration and discussion as well as feedback-oriented selfassessment that students can access outside the lecture hall (Mason and Rennie, 2008; O’Byrne, Patry and Carnegie, 2008). While it is important to recognize that not all students display the same level of engagement with technology (Bennett, Maton and Kervin, 2008), it is also widely accepted that majority of today’s students have grown up immersed in the use of internet-based applications, not only for social interactions, but also for exploration and knowledge acquisition (Ipsos, 2007; Suchanska and Keczkowska, 2007; Saunders and Gale, 2012). This reality has led to the suggestion that the well-planned use of e-learning can provide opportunities to enrich the educational experiences of university undergraduates through the creation of learning communities where students have opportunities to share ideas and apply their new knowledge within appropriate contexts (Mason and Rennie, 2008; Saunders and Gale, 2012). What is learning? Learning involves the reworking and reorganization of new information as it moves from the limited confines of working memory to become encoded and logistically integrated within our knowledge warehouse known as long-term memory (Anderson, 2000; Kirschner, 2002; Kirschner, Sweller and Clark, 2006). Andragogy is defined as the science of teaching adults and a key proponent of this educational philosophy during the latter part of the 20th century was Malcolm Knowles (Smith, 2002). When describing adult learning, Knowles stressed the importance of self-directed and applied learning so that by active reconstruction, the learner can incorporate this newly acquired knowledge into a steadily changing perception of the world.(Knowles, 1984; Pratt, 1993). Also referred to as generative processing, these fundamental principles associated with a constructivist approach to learning have persevered and continue to guide the development of online educational tools in which adult learners are encouraged to select, organize and integrate new information with that already understood and stored in long-term memory (Mayer, 2008, Mayer, 2010). There are a variety of ways in which active learning and selfassessment can be encouraged and the benefits and challenges associated with a number of them will be explored in this chapter. As this journey unfolds, it will be seen that key features shared by many interactive learning tools include not only requirements for learners to use constructivism when learning, but also opportunities to extend their knowledge to the workplace as they practice applying it within suitable practical contexts (Michael, 2006; Mayer, 2008).

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

45

Before going further, it is important to note that an additional essential feature of any self-directed learning tool is the provision of sufficient guidance for the learner during completion of the exercise. When learning, students are using the limited dimensions of working memory because only working memory is associated with knowledge awareness (Heo and Chow, 2005). However, it is also widely recognized that working memory can handle only a small number (four to nine) of items at a single time, with item number inversely affected by item complexity (Miller, 1956; Terrell, 2006). Hence, when developing interactive online learning and self-testing tools, it is important to minimize sources of extraneous cognitive load such as inadequate instruction, confusing procedures, or unrelated distractions because these additional challenges associated with simply the use of the tool itself can detract from the ability of working memory to support learning (Mayer, 2008). Reduced extrinsic cognitive load enriches the learning experience by allowing the student to focus purely on the intrinsic cognitive load, namely the cognitive load that is directly associated with the concept(s) being explored, evaluated and applied (Kirschner, 2002; Heo and Chow, 2005; Mayer, 2008).

USING COURSE WEB SITE TOOLS TO PROMOTE COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION Learning management systems (LMSs) are routinely used to provide varying levels of support for college and university courses (Carvalho, Areal and Silva, 2011). These range from limited student engagement, in which LMSs serve almost exclusively as repositories of course-linked content (instructivist approach), through increasing emphasis on studentcentered constructivist learning (Moule, Ward and Lockyer, 2010). The latter can take the form of blended curricula in which active learning is promoted via the provision of online opportunities for bi-directional communication, completion of assignments and selfevaluations and the receipt of feedback, to fully-online courses where all learning, studentstudent and student-professor interaction and assessment occur within a virtual setting (Francis and Raftery, 2005; Carvalho et al., 2011). This discussion will focus on the middle option, blended courses in which regular didactic lectures are supported by interactive course web sites and it will begin with communication tools. The online discussion boards included in commercially-available course website management tools such as WebCTR, FirstClassR, BlackboardR as well as the widely used open source LMS platform MoodleR can be used effectively to encourage students to extend the amount of time spent interacting with course material beyond the limited number of hours allotted to lectures (Meyer, 2003; Robb, 2004; Brandle, 2005; Marcus, 2005, Landis, Swain, Friehe and Coufal, 2007). The exploration of course content through discussion, be it face-to-face or online, has been proposed to deepen learning through both student engagement and promotion of the construction of a scaffold of correctly linked concepts (Brown, Collins and Duguid, 1989; Rourke and Anderson, 2002; Harris and Sandor, 2007, Andresen, 2009). It has also been proposed to make students more fully aware of different aspects of a particular concept or problem, in this way helping them to more fully appreciate the depth of knowledge and understanding that they need to acquire (Choi, Land and Turgeon, 2005).

46

Jacqueline Carnegie

This social constructivist approach to learning, in which students integrate new information in a meaningful way with what is already known, requires both collaboration and cooperation and these activities can certainly be promoted by interactive dialogue, be it faceto-face or within a virtual classroom (Rourke and Anderson, 2002; Sims, 2003; Hung, Tan and Chen, 2005). Interactive discussions may also constructively promote better understanding by requiring students to justify an explanation that they have provided or to revisit their course notes in order to address gaps in their knowledge and understanding (Choi et al., 2005). In the lecture room, face-to-face discussions can involve simultaneous back-and-forth exchanges, energy, and spontaneity of thinking. Hence they work well for in-class activities such as brainstorming, visual demonstrations, or heated debates regarding a controversial topic (Cantillon, 2003; Meyer, 2003). Furthermore, studies have shown that the promotion of small-group discussion within large undergraduate classes of students studying physiology and chemistry resulted in a more thorough understanding of course content and better student outcomes (Kibble, Hansen and Nelson, 2006; Lewis and Lewis, 2008). But can the same goals be achieved with virtual discussions and are there additional advantages to the use of online approaches to promote inter-student communication? Zha and Ottendorfer (2011) quantitatively compared the acquisition of lower-order and higher-order cognitive skills by students participating in online, asynchronous, immunologyrelated discussions and found positive correlation between cognitive achievement in online discussions and subsequent course learning assessment scores. One important advantage associated with threaded discussions is that they may support higher-order thinking because their very asynchronicity combined with the existence of a visual record of the conversation permits time for reflection and even integration of related concepts before a student posts a comment (Meyer, 2003; Jin, 2005; Dixson, Kuhlhorst and Reiff, 2006; Andresen, 2009). Indeed, the construction of a written answer to explain a concept or justify a line of reasoning promotes the linking of related pieces of information by the learner and this process can lead to a more thorough understanding of that content (Oliver and Naidu, 1996; Choi et al., 2005). In comparison with other types of online interactions, such as chat rooms, it should be noted that discussion boards are likely a better alternative for busy students. Their asynchronous nature results in the creation of an enduring physical record of the conversation, in this way allowing students to communicate with one another without needing to be online at the same time (Dixson et al., 2006). Survey data has revealed that, while students found online discussions to be more timeconsuming than oral discussions occurring during class, they felt that this time was well spent in working more extensively with course objectives and in putting additional thought into the answers they were developing (Meyer, 2003; Shea, Frederickson, Pickett and Pelz, 2004). Indeed, an in-depth exploration of university student perceptions identified online discussions as one of the most valued components of e-learning due to its ability to promote participation and collaboration (Selim, 2005). Additional advantages associated with online discussion boards include a greater likelihood that more timid students will be able to enhance their learning experiences by having the courage to get involved in the discussion and that each student, regardless of his or her ability to quickly process information and construct a reply, will be able to fully express an idea without being interrupted by an enthusiastic colleague (Meyer, 2003; Jin, 2005; Dixson et al., 2006, Andresen, 2009).

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

47

The discussion board also allows the instructor to take the time to more fully appreciate the thoughts and information being presented by students and to assess each student’s level of understanding of course concepts (Marcus, 2005). Many students are strategic learners and, therefore, will not be inclined to use an online tool simply because it exists. Rather, they will make use of a tool if they can see that it links to course objectives and has the potential to improve assessment outcomes (Saunders and Gale, 2012). With that in mind, topic-specific folders should be used judiciously to structure the discussion forum so that students can navigate it easily in order to access relevant postings by their peers and to submit their own contributions. Participation can be encouraged by using some in-class time to raise awareness of the forum and explain its relevance to course learning objectives. As an example of a very basic application, students can readily appreciate curriculum-related benefits of the forum if it is used to provide a risk-free environment where they can post questions regarding content that was incompletely understood during lectures in folders that have been assigned to those topics. Answers to these questions can be provided a single time for all students (rather than multiple times via private emails to individual learners), saving valuable time for the instructor and facilitating more widespread dissemination of explanatory information to students. This chapter author found that the discussion forum had an additional unexpected benefit of allowing exceptional peer tutors to be discovered as a consequence their enthusiastic participation in forum discussions. Interactivity can be classified as learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner (Moore, 1989). These are by no means distinct interactions. They are interdependent and, indeed, all three can be promoted in various ways using discussion boards (Swan, 2002). With regard to learner-learner interactivity when exploring course content, peer-led discussion groups have been widely used to facilitate online collaboration when working on assignments (e.g., Rourke and Anderson, 2002; Harris and Sandor, 2007; Zha et al., 2011; Carnegie, 2012). Students can be randomly sorted into discussion groups using forum tools and optimal discussion has been proposed to occur if group sizes are no larger than seven (McComb, 1994). Within each group the role of peer leader can also be assigned either randomly or via peer-selection. Peer leaders are responsible for initiating and moderating the virtual discussion, editing and critiquing student contributions and posting the final submission of their group to the rest of the class (Rourke and Anderson, 2002; Harris and Sandor, 2007; Zha et al., 2011; Carnegie, 2012). The other group members (responders) are also key participants in this process. They contribute postings to the online discussion and actively learn through their interactions with other respondents as well as from feedback provided by the group leader (Rourke and Anderson, 2002; Ferrante, Green and Forster, 2006; Kibble et al., 2006; Lewis and Lewis, 2008). In this approach, private discussion folders can used to restrict access to only the members of a specific group (and the instructor) while ideas are exchanged and the answer constructed and refined. The team leader can then share the final posting via a second folder, a public folder, to which all class members and the instructor have access (Carnegie, 2012). The use of peer-learning has been reported to promote student engagement and improve students’ overall course satisfaction (Jiang and Ting, 2000; Jin, 2005). The results of one study revealed that while students, in general, were reluctant to assume the higher demands associated with peer leadership, they found that the added responsibility and time commitment provided them with a superior learning experience (Zha and Ottendorfer, 2011). This observation led the authors to emphasize the importance of distributing the role of peer leader among all students whenever possible.

48

Jacqueline Carnegie

ONLINE SELF-ASSESSMENT LMS software often contains self-testing tools as part of the package. The creation of course-specific self-assessment exercises using these tools provides opportunities for students to not only evaluate their progress in learning but also to obtain instantaneous explanatory feedback when an incorrect answer is selected. For example, the self-test assessment feature of Blackboard allows multiple-choice questions to be constructed with an unlimited number of answer choices, a single accurate answer or multiple correct choices, and immediate educational feedback for every answer at the moment that particular response is selected by a student. Similarly, Moodle supports the establishment of test banks that can then be used to generate quizzes that are composed of a variety of question types, can be timed, allow multiple possible correct answers per question, permit multiple possible tries per question and per assessment exercise, and include the option to give question-by-question feedback to students (Robb, 2004; Brandl, 2005; Martin-Blas and Serrano-Fernandez, 2009; Yasar and Adiguzel, 2010). Such exercises can be tremendously helpful to students because they address three key items of Robert Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction (Gagné, Briggs and Wager, 1992). The Nine Events describe a series of processes that should take place in order for effective learning to occur and, while this list was published some time ago, it continues to influence instructional design because it address basic principles such as the need to engage and motivate learners, to guide them to make links with what is already known, to provide feedback, and to enhance retention and transfer (Kinzie, 2005; O’Byrne et al., 2008). With regard to online self-assessment, the creation of feedback-oriented self-testing exercises offers opportunities for students to practise applying what they have learned (event six), to obtain immediate feedback so that they can correct errors in their knowledge or reasoning (event seven), and have their performance assessed (formative exam scores give students a measurement of their mastery of course content; event eight). Textbook publishers are increasingly offering similar types of flexible, online self-testing tools as part of their textbook packages. The creation of coursespecific regular assignments for students using these tools has been shown to improve student outcomes by encouraging them to interact regularly with course material, to improve their understanding of course content by making use of the instructional feedback, and to identify areas of weakness that would benefit from additional study before they tackle summative examinations (Carnegie, 2011). The flexibility of Moodle lends itself well to the support of exercises developed using other software packages as well as alternative types of assessment-based e-learning. For example, the freeware Hot PotatoesR (http://www.hotpot.uvic.ca/), developed by Half-Baked Software Inc., has been widely used to develop interactive exercises such as quizzes, crossword puzzles and matching and ordering activities (Robb, 2004; Ward, 2004; Caric, Tuba and Moisil, 2010). The creation of a module (HotPot) for Moodle has made it possible for these exercises to be fully integrated into a Moodle-supported class web site by allowing student scores to be tracked when they complete these exercises (Robb, 2004). Another valuable component of Moodle that supports the constructivist vision of learning as an ongoing process is its Workshop module (Brandl, 2005; Robertson, 2008). Here, students can assess written work submitted by their peers while they, themselves, are evaluated as to the quality of the peer assessments they are providing.

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

49

Finally, QuandaryR is an action-maze software also produced by Half-Baked Software Inc. that can be used to promote learning and self-assessment in a variety of ways (Holmes and Arneil, 2009). It can assume a story-telling function as students make selections that help them learn about important figures and events in history (Field, 2009), or it can provide medical students with much-needed practice for bell-ringer anatomy exams or with the development of their clinical decision-making skills (Carnegie, Iafolla and Weinstangel, 2010). This author has even used Quandary to construct exercises that help students hone their writing abilities as they construct answers to short essay-style questions.

DEVELOPMENT OF INTERACTIVE E-LEARNING MODULE CONTENT An important advantage associated with e-learning is the ability to use additional presentation modes, such as animations and videos, in order to address alternative modalities of learning (Moreno and Mayer, 2000; Mayer and Moreno, 2003; Mayer, 2008). Animations are particularly useful for allowing students to visualize an interdependent sequence of events whether they are studying history, biology, or mathematics. Compared to static diagrams, animations can reduce the intrinsic cognitive load for students by allowing them to see the flow of steps that compose a process and the way in which one step leads to the next, rather than requiring them to exhaust the limited capacity of working memory to mentally picture that sequence of events, fill in the visual information gaps and create the linkages for themselves (Lowe, 2001; Ruffini, 2009). PowerPointR, a presentation software already widely used by instructors for lecture delivery, has a number of features that lend themselves well to the development of simple instructional animations (de Wer, 2006; Carnegie, Leddy, De Jesus, De Jesus and Crawford, 2008; Ruffini, 2009). For example, the four images shown in Figure 1 are screen shots selected from a short PowerPoint learning module that animates the process of dehydration synthesis. Students are able to see the two monosaccharides approach each other, following which the removal of a molecule of water links them via the formation of a glycoside bond, producing a disaccharide. Animations can also appeal to student learning styles that may not be addressed strongly during lectures (O’Byrne et al., 2008). The VARK system categorizes learner preferences as visual, aural, read/write and kinesthetic (Fleming and Mills, 1992; Fleming and Bonwell, 2001). Studies looking at student populations with reference to medicine and related health sciences have shown undergraduate classes to be composed of heterogeneous populations of students employing various combinations of these four strategies as they learn (Baykan and Nicar, 2007; Slater, Lujan and Dicarlo, 2007; Carnegie, 2008). Hence, while lectures are often most useful for aural and read/write learners, access to online animations to support course content can be especially useful for visual learners. Furthermore, animations that can be manipulated by the student have an added value for kinesthetic learners. For all students, the option to replay an animation multiple times as it is contained within an online learning module, rather than being shown it only a single time during lecture, affords the opportunity to tackle the information a bit at a time, in manageable chunks, so that a synthesis of the entire process can eventually be accomplished (Lowe, 2001).

50

Jacqueline Carnegie

Figure 1. Selected images from a PowerPoint-created animation illustrating the process of dehydration synthesis.

However, animations should be used carefully and with thorough planning, to ensure that they are constructed in such a way that they address curriculum learning objectives and that student attention is being directed toward those elements of the animation that will contribute most to their learning (Lowe, 2000, 2001). Graphics should be kept as simple and direct as possible, including only those elements that have educational value (Lowe, 2001). Dynamic arrows and highlighting can be used judiciously to cue learner attention to the most important aspects of an animation so as to maximize effectiveness (Mayer, 2008). That said, these visual enhancements should be used sparingly, so as not to be distracting and contribute to extraneous cognitive load (Mayer and Moreno, 2003; de Wer, 2006). Extraneous cognitive load represents the extra mental processing required in response to the manner of presentation of the information and, if excessive, can detract from the quality of the message itself (Sweller, van Merrienboer and Paas, 1998). Another strategy to reduce cognitive load when presenting a complex series of events is to combine audio with the animation so that two modalities can be used simultaneously to process the information (Mayer and Moreno, 2003). According to the split attention principle, the auditory and visual pathways of the brain use different short-tem memory systems to receive, organize and finally integrate new information into long-term memory (Moreno and Mayer, 2000). Hence, the use of both neural systems simultaneously by having an instructive animation accompanied by a verbal explanation frees up a larger volume of short term memory during learning and allows the various aspects of an intricate process to be more easily assimilated and understood by the student (Mayer and Moreno, 2003; Mayer, 2008).

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

51

MOBILE LEARNING Mobile learning (m-learning) is an extension of e-learning that has the added advantage of allowing students to access their course content while on the move using hand-held devices such as an iPod, an iPad or a smartphone (Evans, 2008). The content is presented in the form of audio podcasts, with or without accompanying video, that are “pushed” to the feed’s subscribers making them easily available to all learners who subscribe to that feed (Evans, 2008; Jalali, Leddy, Gauthier, Sun, Hincke and Carnegie, 2011). This level of accessibility allows busy students to extend their study time and location to include the bus or train during the daily commute to and from school or even the gym when exercising on a treadmill or stationary bicycle. It is also important to realize that, while the maximal advantage of podcasts derives from their ability to be used with mobile devices, they can also be downloaded onto computers, allowing student access to be almost universal and not dependent on one’s ability to afford a portable device (Evans, 2008). Podcasts have been used to provide concise lecture reviews, to help clarify content covered during lectures, to provide problem solving examples, and to allow efficient revision of course content when students are preparing for exams (Berger, 2007; Evans, 2008; Jalali et al., 2011). Students can listen to an entire podcast from start to finish or select certain components for multiple listening as they grapple with the more challenging concepts in that lecture (Maag, 2006). Survey data from undergraduate business students indicated a preferred length of five to fifteen minutes per podcast with very few respondents indicating that they would listen to a podcast of longer than twenty minutes duration (Frydenberg, 2006). One concern raised repeatedly by instructors is that the convenience of podcasts might encourage students to use them as a replacement for rather than a supplement to lecture attendance, leading them to be increasingly learning in isolation rather than being actively engaged in the social constructivist learning that can occur within the classroom (Jham, Duraes, Strassler and Sensi, 2008). A recent review shows that the question of whether or not access to recorded lectures has a negative impact on class attendance continues to be controversial and that the answer likely depends to some extent on whether it is the entire lecture or an abbreviated summary that is being made available as a podcast. While a number of studies have demonstrated no impact of podcasts on class attendance, the results of other studies have suggested a link between online availability of lecture podcasts and reduced turnout to class (reviewed by Jalali et al., 2011). The relatively short podcast duration preferred by students suggests that this medium is likely better used for the provision of concise reviews or to amplify a single concept, rather than to serve as an alternative means of accessing a lecture in its entirety.

STUDENTS ARE AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE While instructors certainly have significant insight into curriculum content and those aspects of a course that have the potential to be conceptually more challenging, their students must also be recognized as important sources of information regarding what they had difficulty learning and as valuable resources who can contribute creative ideas and alternative perspectives to the development of student-friendly online learning tools.

52

Jacqueline Carnegie

Students may facilitate the construction of engaging learning tools by having supportive computer expertise that is not shared by the instructor (e.g. the use of Adobe FlashR to create interactive animations; O’Byrne et al., 2008). Furthermore, undergraduate students who have just completed a course are well placed to identify those concepts that they found most troublesome so that the time spent developing online learning and self-testing tools is used effectively. Students may also be more inclined to try a risky or innovative idea and may be better able to script a scenario to which their peers can relate when applying their new knowledge in context. Student involvement can be promoted by the institution itself. For example, the University of Ottawa has recently established an Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program (UROP) that links interested students with faculty sponsors and provides financial support for single-term research projects. During the past year, this program has allowed the author to supervise students who have just completed courses in anatomy and physiology as they develop videos and interactive exercises that engage student interest, illustrate body structure and physiological concepts more clearly, provide practice in application, and promote learning for subsequent sessions of those same courses (Carnegie and Stokes, 2012). There is one additional way in which students can provide valuable assistance with the development of learning tools and that is to provide feedback to the instructor as to the actual ability of that tool to engage their interest, challenge their reasoning, and contribute positively to their learning experience (Martin-Blas and Serrano-Fernandez, 2008; Moule et al., 2010; Carvalho et al., 2011). Concise survey forms with Likert-based questions can easily be developed and distributed to students in order to obtain anonymous and quantitative data as to the ease of use of the learning tool, its ability to engage interest and facilitate comprehension and the ways in which it promoted learning success. The inclusion of some open-ended questions in the survey can allow the instructor to identify and correct any weaknesses in the learning tool and also to be made cognizant of any other challenging aspects of the curriculum for which students would welcome the support of a learning module.

CONCLUSION Technology can be used effectively and easily to create engaging learning opportunities beyond the classroom. LMSs support social constructivism through communication tools such as discussion forums that permit interactive exploration of course content and peer-led completion of assignments and peer-assessment. Various forms of e-assessment engage learners by allowing them to monitor their progress in learning, to engage more actively with course content, and to practice applying new knowledge in appropriate contexts. Mobile learning continues to expand the dimensions of the classroom in ways never imagined even a few years ago. Students can be an excellent resource for both the development and for the subsequent evaluation of online learning and self-testing modules. Constant advances in technology will continue to provide new ways to support e-learning. The challenge will be to select those methodologies that will be effective because they align well with the ways in which students learn.

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

53

REFERENCES Anderson, J. R. (2000). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications (5th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers. Andresen, M. A. (2009). Asynchronous discussion forums: success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Educational Technology and Society, 12(1), 249-257. Baykan, Z. and Naçar, M. (2007). Learning styles of first-year medical students attending Erciyes University in Kayseri, Turkey. Advances in Physiology Education, 31, 158-160. Bennett, S., Maton, K. and Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. Berger, E. (2007). Podcasting in engineering education: a preliminary study of content, student attitudes, and impact. Innovate: Journal of Online Education 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info. Brandle, K. (2005). Are you ready to “MOODLE”? Language, Learning and Technology, 9 (2), 16-23. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18(1), 32-42. Cantillon, P. (2003). ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: teaching large groups. British Medical Journal, 326, 437-440. Caric, M., Tuba, M. and Moisil, I. (2010). Web-based testing and self-assessment systems implemented with open technologies. In: P. Dondon and O. Martin (Eds.), Latest trends on engineering education (pp.287-292). Stevens Point, WI: WSEAS Press. Carnegie, J. (2008). Know your audience: linking effective physiology instruction with student learning preferences. Human Anatomy and Physiology Society Educator, 12(2), 25-27. Carnegie, J. (2011). MyLab / Mastering Success Story: Using Mastering AandP. Retrieved from http://catalogue.pearsoned.ca/assets/ca/mylabmastering/SuccessStory_Mastering AP.pdf. Carnegie, J. A. (2012). The use of limericks to engage student interest and promote active learning in an undergraduate course in functional anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education 5, 90-97. Carnegie, J., Iafolla, M. and Weinstangel, H. (2010). CDM Questions: software allows students to practice new question style online before summative exams. Journal of the International Association of Medical Science Educators 20(2s), 173. Carnegie, J., Leddy, J., De Jesus, C., De Jesus, J., and Crawford, M. (2008). The development of self-directed basic science learning modules for new medical students. Canadian Association for Medical Education Newsletter 18(2), 3-5. Retrieved from http://www. came-acem.ca/docs/newsletters/18_2/newsletter_18_2_en.pdf. Carnegie, J. and Stokes, Y. (2012, May). An orthopedic night in emergency: engaging student interest through the application of musculoskeletal anatomy knowledge. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Conference of the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society, Tulsa, OK. Carvalho, A., Areal, N. and Silva, J. (2011). Students’ perceptions of Blackboard and Moodle in a Portuguese university. British Journal of Educational Technology 42(5), 824-841.

54

Jacqueline Carnegie

Choi, I., Land, S. M. and Turgeon, A. J. (2005). Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science 33, 483-511. De Wer, C. F. (2006). Beyond presentations: using PowerPoint as an effective instructional tool. Gifted Child Today 29(4), 29-39. Dixson, M., Kuhlhorst, M. and Reiff, A. (2006). Creating effective online discussions: optimal instructor and student roles. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 10(4), 15-28. Evans, C. (2008). The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education. Computers and Education 50, 491-498. Ferrante, C. J., Green, S. G. and Forster, W. R. (2006). Getting more out of team projects: incentivizing leadership to enhance performance. Journal of Management Education 30 (6), 788-797. Field, A. (2009). Henry II and Thomas Becket. Retrieved from http://www.schoolhistory.co. uk/lessons/becket/becket.htm Fleming, N. and Bonwell, C. (2001). VARK: How do I learn best? A student’s guide to improved learning. Christchurch, NZ: Fleming and Bonwell. Fleming, N. D. and Mills, C. (1992). Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy 11, 137-142. Francis, R. and Raftery, J. (2005). Blended learning landscapes. Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching 1(3), 1-5. Frydenberg, M. (2006). Principles and pedagogy: the two p’s of podcasting in the information technology classroom. Proceedings of the Information Systems Education Conference, 23, 3354-3363. Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J. and Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Harris, N. and Sandor, M. (2007). Developing online discussion forums as student centred peer e-learning environments. Proceedings Ascilite Singapore 2007. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/harris.pdf Heo, M. and Chow, A. (2005). The impact of computer augmented online learning and assessment tool. Educational Technology and Society 8(1), 113-125. Holmes, M. and Arneil, S. (2009). Quandary. Victoria, BC: Half-Baked Software. Retrieved from http://www.halfbakedsoftware.com/index.php Hung, D., Tan, S. C. and Chen, D-T. (2005). How the internet facilitates learning as dialog: design considerations for online discussions. International Journal of Instructional Media 32(1), 37-46. Ipsos. (2007). Student expectations study: findings from preliminary research. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/studentexpectationsbp.aspx. Jalali, A., Leddy, J., Gauthier, M., Sun, R., Hincke, M., and Carnegie, J. (2011). Use of podcasting as an innovative asynchronous e-learning tool for students. US-China Education Review A 6, 741-748. Jham, B. C., Duraes, G. V., Strassler, H. E., and Sensi, L. G. (2008). Joining the podcast revolution. Journal of Dental Education 73(3), 278-281. Jiang, M. and Ting, E. (2000). A study of factors influencing students’ perceived learning in a web-based course environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 6(4), 317-338.

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

55

Jin, S. H. (2005). Analyzing student-student and student-instructor interaction through multiple communication tolls in web-based learning. International Journal of Instructional Media 32(1), 59-67. Kibble, J., Hansen, P. A. and Nelson, L. (2006). Use of modified SOAP notes and peer-led small –group discussion in a Medical Physiology course: addressing the hidden curriculum. Advances in Physiology Education 30, 230-236 Kinzie, M. B. (2005). Instructional design strategies for health behavior change. Patient Education and Counseling 56, 3-15. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction 1, 1-10. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discover, problembased, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychology 4, 75-86. Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. Applying modern principles of adult education (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Landis, M., Swain, K. D., Friehe, M. J., and Coufal, K. L. (2007). Evaluating critical thinking in class and online: comparison of the Newman method and the Facione rubric. Communication Disorders Quarterly 28(3), 135-143. Lewis, S. E. and Lewis, J. E. (2008). Seeking effectiveness and equity in a large college chemistry course: an HLM investigation of peer-led inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 45(7), 794-811. Lowe, R. K. (2000). Animation of diagrams: an aid to learning? In: M. Anderson, P. Cheng and V. Haarslev (Eds.), Theory and application of diagrams. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. Lowe, R. K. (2001). Beyond “eye-candy”: improving learning with animations. Proceedings of the Apple University Consortium Conference. Retrieved from http://auc.uow.edu.au/ conf/conf01/downloads/AUC2001_Lowe.pdf Maag, M. (2006). iPod, uPod? An emerging mobile learning tool in nursing education and students’ satisfaction. In: L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear and P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology? (pp. 483-492). Sydney, New South Wales: Sydney University Press. Marcus, S. R. (2005). Discussion boards in theatre arts education: help or hindrance? Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 1(2), 1-5. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol1_ no2_marcus.htm Martin-Blas, T. and Serrano-Fernandez, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in Physics. Computers and Education 52, 3544. Mason, R. and Rennie, F. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: resources for higher education. London: Routledge. Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist 63(8), 760-769. Mayer, R. E. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock’s enduring contributions to the science of learning. Educational Psychologist 45(1), 46-50. Mayer, R. E. and Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist 38(1), 43-52.

56

Jacqueline Carnegie

McComb, M. (1994). Benefits of computer-mediated communication in college courses. Communication Education 43(2), 159-170. Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: the role of time and higherorder thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(3), 55-65. Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education 30, 159-167. Miller, G. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: some limits of our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63, 381-397. Moreno, R. and Mayer, R. E. (2000). A learner-centered approach to multimedia explanations: deriving instructional design principles from cognitive theory. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning 2(2). Retrieved from http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/2000/2/05/index.asp. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 3(2), 1-7. Moule, P., Ward, R. and Lockyer, L. (2010). Nursing and healthcare students’ experiences and use of e-learning in higher education. Journal of Advanced Nursing 66(12), 27852795. O’Byrne, P. J., Patry, A. and Carnegie, J. A. (2008). The development of interactive online learning tools for the study of anatomy. Medical Teacher 30: e260-e271. Oliver, M. and Naidu, S. (1996). Building a computer supported co-operative learning environment in medical-surgical practice for undergraduate RNs from rural and remote areas: working together to enhance health care. Missouri, US: University of Kansas. Pratt, D. D. (1993). Andragogy after twenty-five years. In: S. B. Merriam SB (Ed.), Update on adult learning theory: new directions for adult and continuing education, No. 57 (1st ed.) (pp. 15-25). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Robertson, C. E. Integration of Moodle course management system (CMS) into an EFL writing class. Journal of the Association for Learning Technology – Computer-Assisted Language Learning 4(1), 53-59. Robb, T. N. (2004). Moodle: a virtual learning environment for the rest of us. Teaching English as a Second Language e-Journal 8(2), 1-8. Rourke, L. and Anderson, T. (2002). Using peer teams to lead online discussions. Journal of Interactive Media Education 1, 1-21. Ruffini, M. (2009). Creating animations in PowerPoint to support student learning and engagement. Educause Quarterly 32(4). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/ article/creating-animations-powerpoint-support-student-learning-and-engagement. Saunders, F. C. and Gale, A. W. (2012). Digital or didactic: using learning technology to confront the challenge of large cohort teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology 43(6), 847-858. Schermerhorn, S. M., Goldschmid, M. L. and Shore, B. M. (1976). Peer teaching in the classroom: rationale and feasibility. Improving Human Performance Quarterly 5(1), 2734. Selim, H. M. (2005). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: confirmatory factor models. Computers and Education 49, 396-413. Shea, P. J., Fredericksen, E. E., Pickett, A. M., and Pelz, W. (2004). Faculty development, student satisfaction, and reported learning in the SUNY Learning Network. In: T. M. Duffy and J. R. Kirkley (Eds.), Learner-centered theory and practice in distance

The Creation and Implementation of Interactive Opportunities …

57

education: cases from higher education (pp. 343-377). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sims, R. (2003). Promises of interactivity: aligning learner perceptions and expectations with strategies for flexible and online learning. Distance Education 24(1), 87-103. Slater, J. A., Lujan, H. L. and Dicarlo, S. E. (2007). Does gender influence learning styles preferences of first-year medical students? Advances in Physiology Education 31, 336342. Smith, M. K. (2002). Malcolm Knowles, informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy. The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://www.infed. org/thinkers/et-knowl.htm. Suchanska, M. and Keczkowska, J. (2007). Some aspects of employing the Moodle platform as a tool for enhancing the teaching and learning process. Proceedings of the International Conference (EUROCON): Computer as a Tool: 2465-2467. Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: the importance of interaction. Education, Communication and Information 2(1), 23-29. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G. and Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10(3), 251-296. Terrell, M. (2006). Anatomy of learning: Instructional design principles for the anatomical sciences. Anatomical Record Part B: New Anatomist 289B, 252-260. Ward, A. (2004). Smart classrooms and hybrid courses. Journal of College Teaching and Learning 1(8), 79-90. Yasar, O. and Adiguzel, T. (2010). A working successor of learning management systems: SLOODLE. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences 2, 5682-5685. Zha, S. and Ottendorfer, C. L. (2011). Effects of peer-led online asynchronous discussion on undergraduate students’ cognitive achievement. The American Journal of Distance Education 25, 238-253.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 5

A DESIGN FRAMEWORK FOR ENHANCING ON-LINE LEARNING Wendy Fasso,1 Cecily Knight2 and Bruce Allen Knight1 1

Central Queensland University, Queensland, Australia James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia

2

ABSTRACT This chapter proposes a holistic online course design framework that is drawn from theory and empirical research-based principles. This framework is aimed at assuring pedagogical consistency in course design at higher education level and facilitation that maximises the potential of contemporary technology for student learning. It is organised into complementary and often overlapping principles about learning that are drawn from published research. The principles discussed in this chapter included: learning occuring within a community of practice; learning is learner-centred; learning is flexible and based on individual needs; learning is resource-based, and technology-mediated; learning is both individual, and networked; learning is demonstrated when new, and valued knowledge is created; learning is cognitive, affective, social and sensory-motor; learning is best supported through constructive alignment of assessment, curriculum and pedagogy; and learning is best when activities are purposeful and aligned with assessment.

Keywords: Online learning, learning design, higher education, pedagogy

THE CONTEXT Over the past decade, e-learning has been successfully integrated into learning and teaching in universities to support and enhance traditional teaching methods (Laurillard, 2006). However, the uses of the opportunities offered by technology are not as widely used to support active collaboration, role-play, modelling, creativity, and connectedness to worlds beyond the university (Davidson and Goldberg, 2012). These technologies offer a multitude of opportunities to extend and transform pedagogy and learning, nonetheless, as late as 2010,

60

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

the claim is still made that higher education practice continues to be isolated from the growing evidence base about contemporary practice and good learning (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). Rather than transform teaching practice, lecturers appear to be appropriating those technologies based on ease of incorporation into existing teaching activity rather than those which radically change teaching and learning practices (Kirkup and Kirkwood, 2005). Such practices, however, are understandable if the staff member is a novice regarding teaching with technology but at the same time an experienced teacher. Working in this learning community involves an examination of the broader organisational context in which the teaching and learning takes place. Much of the literature covering online learning reports the perspectives of organisation, the role of the course designer and tutor, or the uptake of the technology itself (e.g. Sharpe, Beetham, de Freitas and Conole, 2010), with significantly less focus on the development of research-supported online pedagogies appropriate for student learning. Yet already, much of higher education contemporary face-to-face practice includes a variety of media, and has been informed by practices emerging from distance education courses (Kirkup and Kirkwood, 2005). The way we design for interactivity, active learning, support and administration are now, for the most part, achieved using Information Communication Technology (ICT) and digital media (Kirkup and Kirkwood, 2005; Salmon, 2002). Beyond this, lecturers have identified changes to their face to face pedagogy, based on their online teaching experiences, that includes strategies to support greater diversity, student engagement, and student-centred facilitative approaches to teaching and learning (Duncan and Young, 2009). A whole curriculum pedagogical approach is needed for the integration of technologies into learning and teaching if we are to avoid what Goodyear and Ellis (2010) refer to as the ‘bolt-on effect’ (p. 103). This may occur when teachers reflect on information delivery rather than the development of students’ understanding, with poor conceptions of the transformative affordances of ICT used to support teaching and learning. What is needed is an integration of technologies into teaching so that it becomes part of individual practice (Gosper, nd). A complete curriculum approach to designing online learning promises also to support the needs of students enrolled in internal mode, who expect to experience the same online interactions that are available to students enrolled in external mode (Horsley, Knight and Huntly, 2010). By adding an online component, lecturers have identified providing a ‘voice’ to less vocal, and more reflective students (Duncan and Young, 2009). Indeed, the modality of the synchronous tutorial may be the only element that differs between internal and distance learning. Students have indicated that technology allows them the flexibility to choose not only when and where to access content and interactive experiences, but also when and where to access lectures (Gosper, nd). Raised as a common problem in the literature (e.g. Arenas, 2008; Bates, 2011; McNeill and Gosper, 2010), many students no longer attend face to face lectures regularly, which brings into question the role of the traditional lecture, as well as the assumptions that internal students are always on campus (Woo, Gosper, McNeill, Preston, Green, and Phillips , 2008). This is not just an Australian issue as this issue is also experienced in countries such as the United States and Britain (Massingham and Herrington, 2006). Universities must demonstrate sensitivity to student needs for flexibility, with quality online learning designs (Barnes and Tynan, 2007). This prompts a necessary inspection of the way in which on-line courses are framed and designed.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

61

LEARNING OCCURS IN A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE Within the learning community, the facilitating role of the lecturer is critical. The lecturer frames the disciplinary ways of thinking through good learning design that immerses learners in practice. The role of the lecturer moves from the source of knowledge, to a facilitator of new knowledge building within the learning community (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). Furthermore, a skilled teacher overcomes a traditional view of individual learning and supports collaborative and socially mediated modes of learning using associated pedagogies (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). They support the creation of a disciplinary lens through which learners see meanings that are appropriated from a community of practice, leading to the formation of an identity within that community (Hung and Chen, 2001). From Lave and Wenger’s (1991) perspective, the identity is analysed as being embedded in the learning context where individuals all contribute. The role of the teacher then, is to structure the learning environment so that members are “fully engaged in the process of creating, refining, communicating and using knowledge” (Lave and Wenger, 1991, p.111). Within the community of learners, dialogue is critical, with language used as a scaffold to support the development of individual identities and relationships within the community’s collective activities. Through this, learners interpret, , apply, act on feedback, and reflect on their learning (Laurillard, 2002). This conversational approach to learning has been shown to improve student learning and enhance student outcomes (Bower, Hedberg and Kuswara, 2009). Students receive instruction and resources that are capable of being individualised, and accommodate their learning needs as they actively contribute to the relationships they establish with their peers in the community of learners (Hung and Chen, 2001). Feedback is critical, and within the learning community, technologies provide opportunities for lecturer support as well as other community support from peers (Creanor and Trinder, 2010).

LEARNING IS LEARNER CENTRED ● ●

The role of the lecturer is to scaffold, model and support learning The role of the learner is to construct an individual and contextual knowledge of the discipline

Wrede (2003) emphasises that lecturers need to design curricula that encourage students’ independence, creativity and networking skills. The institution and its resources are no longer the sole source of learning for students, whose informal learning and social communication has been transformed by technology (Davidson and Goldberg, 2012). They have access to ubiquitous and mobile technologies, interactive social networking software, all sculpted and customized to suit the individual. The pace of change is accelerating, and higher education is struggling to keep pace with change. More importantly, the change in technologies and their affordances should be transforming pedagogies associated with the mobile, personal web (Johnson, Levine, and Smith, 2009). There is a shift in terms of the tools used and artefacts produced towards more participatory and communicative uses (de Freitas and Conole, 2010).

62

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

Associated with this shift is an implicit challenge to the traditional and authoritative ownership of knowledge by academics. Learners are not only able to access information from a variety of sources, they are also emerging as creators of digital artefacts, including text, audio and multimedia, thus blurring the boundaries between users and creators (Luckin Logan, Clark, Graber, Oliver and Mee, 2008). Open source materials are freely available, such as those offered by Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT, and learners are able to take a position of empowerment in critiquing the educational institution and its unique role in their formal learning (Seely Brown and Adler, 2008). Many learners enter higher education with significant prior learning and expertise, and are able to contribute to learning if supported (Ryberg and Dirckinck-Holmfield, 2010). Thus, the affordances of the web are making learner-centred education a reality, with tools that enable collaborative creation of text, and media; and social networking capable of supporting multiple communities of learning (McLoughlin and Lee, 2011). For students who welcome presentation and didactic pedagogy, the affordances of ICT are not being currently used to increase expectations and reduce the existing power relationships in learning (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2010). The implication for online learning design is that where feasible, learners should be empowered to participate in individually determined ways, with guidance and scaffolded support created and maintained by the lecturer. Empowered self-directed learning encourages students to determine goals, identify appropriate resources and evaluate outcomes.

LEARNING IS FLEXIBLE AND BASED ON INDIVIDUAL NEEDS ●

●

Learners come to a course with individual skill-sets and experiences. The learning of those less prepared should be highly scaffolded, whilst opportunities are provided for the growth of the best prepared Resources and tools provided should cater to individual needs

Not all individuals have similar requirements when participating in an online course (Davidson and Goldberg, 2012), with some indicating a preference for working in isolation and independently while others are highly dependent on interaction and support. Meeting individual needs to ensure that learners gain the knowledge and skills to enable full participation in the learning community is a core consideration when designing courses and online activities. Online learners indicate a preference for a range of media which present information in different ways and thus maintain their motivation (Davidson and Goldberg, 2012). They also value the provision of a range of optional resources to extend their learning (Armatas, Holt and Rice, 2003). Learners have been found to use a wide range of self-selected ICT tools, with boundaries between formal and informal learning blurred (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). A course design that maximises the potential of learner-selected tools will support individualisation and flexibility. Much of learning behaviour is unseen, including that which is transacted in individually generated and flexible learner networks (Creanor and Trinder, 2010).

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

63

Reliance on a single selected set of tools, such as discussion forums for learners can emphasize inequities. In response to this, learners may elect to go ‘underground’ (Creanor and Trinder, 2010). Whilst the discussion forum has been, from its inceptions as an online collaboration tool, designed to support the construction of personal meaning through collaboration (Bates, 1995), the evolution of new online collaboration tools such as wikis and blogs has not widely resulted in their use in higher education. Messages contributed early in the thread are accessed widely, however learners who reflect, and then contribute later based on individual context, learning preference and prior knowledge are not responded to as frequently (Stodel, Thompson and MacDonald , 2006; Thomas, 2002), leading to inequitable opportunities for collaboration. Whilst forums evolved over time, a large number of student messages terminated branches as the contributions become more disjointed and fragmented with the sense of “monologue vs. monologue” (Thomas, 2002, p. 361). However, forums were valued by a number of participants in the Thomas (2002) study, and have been found to increase critical thinking and interactive dialogue. Furthermore, the nature of discourse in forums potentially disadvantages some learners, with written forms of communication not necessarily being the medium of communication that is preferred by all (Stodel, et al., 2006; Thomas, 2002). Greater attention is needed when designing collaborative activities in courses, with attention to the collaboration tools, individual needs, and timing being critical in providing genuine flexibility for individual learners. The shift to openness from private systems (for instance moving beyond the confines of a Learning Management System LMS into webbased tools) will support greater engagement from non-participating or silent learners (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). It is important to recognise that learners can contribute their own expertise to teaching and learning (Beetham and Oliver, 2010). The nature of tasks and assessment to meet individual needs should also be scrutinised. Students will not respond to collaborative work if it is not relevant, or if there is the potential for inequitable contribution (Duncan and Young, 2009). Whilst some students are ready to participate in establishing discussion threads in forums, many participate only in the closing stages of the course, and only when this is linked to assessment (Thomas, 2002). The course must be structured to balance the goal of learner centeredness and learner responsibility. While holding students accountable to, and enforcing deadlines is important, flexibility is necessary within those deadlines to allow for life events. For many learners, online learning can be isolating, and setbacks can lead to attrition (Duncan and Young, 2009). Support for all learner needs is critical, and adjustments by teachers to accommodate the flexibility needs of learners are important.

LEARNING IS RESOURCE BASED, AND TECHNOLOGY MEDIATED ● ●

Resources and technologies should be designed and selected based on identified learning outcomes Resources and technologies should be designed and selected based on learner needs and preferences

64

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

Technology is changing the face of online education. Blogs, podcasts, wikis, emails, web conferencing and online discussion allow students to extend the classroom into the workplace and other authentic contexts to extend learning beyond the traditional classroom and into the broader community (Boulos, Maramba, and Wheeler, 2006; Hemmi, Bayne, and Land, 2009; Laurillard, 2007). For most students this is reflective of existing social networking practice, in which they already collaborate, search for information, communicate and socialise using web technologies as part of their everyday lives. Although not homogenous across any group, parallel to their use of institutional technology is the use of learner-selected technologies, which often overlap with their social technology use (Conole, de Laat, Dillon, and Darby, 2007; Kennedy, Judd, Churchward, Gray, and Krause, 2008). However caution is advised if assuming that all learners translate social into learning practice, or that any use of social software is linked to age (Sharpe and Beetham, 2010). The prototypical perceptions of the digitally-savvy net generation (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005) should be balanced with perceptions of the digital divide. Already identified in the previous section is the importance of planning learning to support student needs and offer flexibility. Laurillard (2007), in her foreword to “Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age”, identifies the capacity of ICT to cater to most of learner needs, extending even beyond what is manageable in a face-to-face context. However, the selection of technologies must be planned and pedagogically intentional to maximise their potential. Increasing the scope for innovative use of Web 2.0 , typified by generating content, distribution and networking requires an institutional environment that encourages exploration and risk taking, with decisions best made in a whole-program context (Bates, 2011). In this way a shift in learning, beyond traditional, hierarchical structures will lead learners to distribute learning across a range of resources and collaborative groups (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). When selecting technologies and creating resources, consideration should be given to the ways in which not only cognitive, but also social and teaching presences can be created online. Opportunities for dialogue are critical to enhance socially mediated learning. The permanency of online participation through text, audio or video allows greater access by others to the learning of all in an individualised learning environment (Valjataga and Fiedler, 2008). Many teachers and students may still prefer face-to-face contact, and this is well supported by audio/video-links with students in a group setting (Kirkup and Kirkwood, 2005). In the distance situation, this elevates the importance of web-conferencing tools and reconceptualises how they are used. Consideration should also be taken of the increase in mobile technology use for communication. Other technologies such as blogs, wikis, podcasts, audio and videoconferencing, interactive simulations are all identified as high end use of ICT, which increase intellectual exchange and interactivity, and are conducive to higher order thinking and active learning within a flexible environment (Mason and Rennie, 2008). A stronger pedagogical focus on online learning design will support and guide students in learning how to manage tools and services to mediate learning tasks (Bates, 2011). This, of course, includes learners’ participating as creators of content. As independent learners, developing expertise in selecting and integrating a diverse range of tools supports independent and individualised learning (Valtajaga, Pata, and Tammets, 2011).

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

65

Particularly in higher education, personal control over the technological environment that mediates work and study activities is increasingly important (Valjataga and Fiedler, 2008). Course design should forefront digital literacy within the learning materials, and in the demonstrations of student knowledge through assessment. In the commercial, political, educational and social environments of contemporary society, screen-based communication has in most areas replaced paper-based communication (Beetham and Oliver, 2010). When presenting course materials to learners, it should be acknowledged that the ability to decode images and video are increasingly essential literacies and should be supported (Beetham and Oliver, 2010). It is important to scrutinise the profession we are preparing learners for, and identify the modes of communication that will be valued in that professional field. In the case of education, this multimodal communication capacity is valued and commonly used (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). The support of learners and consideration of their needs is critical. From the learner’s perspective, the uptake of technology for learning is influenced by a range of contributing factors (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). These factors include the skill of the learner as a critical filter of information, personal preference and individual ways of working, the nature of the subject matter, and the technical skill and confidence of the learner. Also included are issues such as adequate network access, and ownership of computers that are able to access course materials and online technologies effectively. For many, new definitions of functional access include mobile access, and access to networks of people as well as resources (Sharpe and Beetham, 2010). Mobile phone ownership changes the terms of “access, connectivity, learning environment, temporality and locatedness” (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2010, p 149), emerging as the most frequently used technology for peer-to-peer communication and collaboration (Benfield and De Laat, 2010) . For instance, despite advice to stay on discussion forums, high proportions of learners prefer to resort to synchronous communication with each other, for instance with mobile phones (Benfield and De Laat, 2010). Being institutionally locked into a LMS such as Moodle or Blackboard may limit the flexibility of technology use and potential pedagogy, making the shift to transformed pedagogy difficult (Barnes and Tynan, 2007; Kirkup and Kirkwood, 2005). Although there are administrative advantages and controls, the use of a LMS does not empower learners in the way Web 2.0 can (Bates, 2011). The LMS is powerful in providing opportunities to organize resources, guidelines, procedures and deadlines for students. However, the utilization of Web 2.0 tools for data collection, access to open content and experts, and the co-creation and sharing of media rich assignments and materials extends learning beyond that which can be supported in a LMS (Bates, 2011). This level of coproduction and sharing can lead to a new learner identity online as both a consumer and a producer of knowledge (McLoughlin and Lee, 2011). Thus, whilst learners operate within a LMS that is populated with teacher-generated content, we continue to maintain practices that are no longer congruent with Web developments and their learning affordances. The Web offers tools and affordances that support student-centred pedagogies, with a shift towards and emphasis on students’ ideas, publications, research and interpretations online.

66

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

LEARNING IS BOTH INDIVIDUAL AND NETWORKED ●

●

Learners require individualised and self-managed spaces within which to learn. Within these spaces, they control the locus of information – both human and nonhuman Sharing of the learning process allows other learners the opportunity for vicarious learning.

Institutionalized learning environments are structured mainly around content and driven by the needs of the institution rather than individual students. Furthermore, they represent a typical, application-centred approach that only allows for the performance of a particular, predefined set of activities within closed and rather static systems (Arenas, 2008). Such environments are centrally controlled and managed by the facilitator, who defines the learning objectives, tasks, media, and expected outcomes. The facilitator has limited possibilities to adapt to student preferences for tools that support their personal study aims. Therefore student preferences and prior knowledge are difficult to accommodate. Because a LMS is usually only available to students enrolled in a given course, the opportunity to interact with the outside world is limited as identified in the previous section. Also identified, was the value of distributed environments to enable conversations on subject matter (terminology, concepts), processes (distribution of work, roles, media), and execution (Fiedler and Pata, 2009). Web 2.0 technologies allow students to create and share their own personal learning environments, shifting power from teachers to students. However, this does not mean that the LMS is not necessary as scaffolding and learner support are still needed, including the provision of content, models and guidance (Bates, 2011). When lecturers encourage the use of a range of collaboration tools, students can personalise the ways in which they interact in the learning community. Any well designed course should acknowledge the input of students in configuring not only their own learning relationships, but also their own learning spaces with self-selected mediating technologies (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). In this way, contemporary learning theory and socially situated learning is enacted and modelled in the valuing of learning relationships, the development of autonomous learners with metacognition and self-regulation (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010; McLoughlin and Lee, 2011). Web 2.0 tools empower the end-user to create, disseminate and share information freely. Generally controls are imposed by the users themselves – the democratization of the web - which empowers learners, and supports formation of networks (Bates, 2011).

LEARNING IS DEMONSTRATED WHEN NEW, AND VALUED KNOWLEDGE IS CREATED ●

Depending on the discipline, design decisions and assessment should be based on the opportunities for learners to contribute to the disciplinary knowledge base

The participatory nature of the web allows learners to shift away from authoritative teacher sources, and towards content generated by the former.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

67

In a period of rapid change, knowledge is no longer controlled and stable, and remains open to renewed interpretation, review, and modification by learners, with dissemination of new learning to the community of learners (McLoughlin and Lee, 2011). In this way, learners become producers of knowledge alongside the teacher, with multi-directional learning enabled (de Freitas and Conole, 2010). With this shift, there is a clear requirement that assessment and learning activity be reviewed, with sufficient scaffolding to enhance independent thinking, and spaces to support collaborative and reflective construction of knowledge (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). Goodyear and Ellis (2010) identify issues in online discussions whereby learners rely on the teacher to know the right or wrong answer, requiring ongoing maintenance of discussions by the teacher to check and validate students’ ideas. This supports the idea that learning is about being able to replicate the knowledge of the teacher. The outcome of this type of discussion may involve large amounts of time spent by the teacher in discussion forums, without which students will view forums as being a waste of time (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). Where the educational design can encourage a shift from ‘teacher knows all’ to learners identifying that all ideas are open to improvement, meaningful contributions by learners to the knowledge base can occur and genuine knowledge building take place. A learning design encouraging students to actively contribute to a course should retain open-endedness, interactivity and focussed feedback, strongly reinforcing learners’ expectations of collaborative extending of knowledge (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010). Learners should note that “linearity, narrow problem solving and bounded approaches to learning where knowledge is managed and patrolled by staff is likely to be inappropriate for learning at the university in the twenty first century” (Savin-Baden, 2008, p.154). In this way, student expectations of didactic teacher-controlled learning are challenged. Furthermore, if we wish to demonstrate that learners have made a valued contribution to the body of disciplinary knowledge, their input should be sufficiently valued by articulating it into new cohorts of learners, who are supported to build upon existing knowledge bases (Goodyear and Ellis, 2010)

LEARNING IS COGNITIVE, AFFECTIVE, SOCIAL AND SENSORI— MOTOR ● ● ● ●

Learning is complex and based on levels of the cognitive domain Learning is affective, and involves domain levels that include attitudes, emotions, feelings, values, enthusiasm and motivations Learning should incorporate the five senses, and be active Learning involves socio-cultural processes through communication, participation, negotiation, collaboration and initiation

Cognitive Learning Online spaces should be informed by designed learning so that they intentionally support and scaffold cognitive learning, with tools and artefacts selected based on their affordances

68

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

for particular learning purposes (Bates, 2011). These tools and artefacts may include collaboration spaces and software, and discipline-specific tools. Collaborative software supports the socio-cultural amplification of knowledge, and promotes deep learning (Hung and Chen, 2001). Through the digitising of contributions, learners are able to contribute, and reformulate their contributions (Rosie, 2001). In a deeply social activity involving transactions with other people, learners are able to see others in the process of learning (vicarious learning) and re-examine their own worldview in the light of a range of other perspectives (Brown and Duguid, 2000). It is therefore important that learners collaborate and share their ideas and perspectives to support not only their own learning, but also that of others. In particular, as they engage with technologies and generate and remix content through analysis, communication of their ideas is valuable (Bates, 2011). Resource-based learning provides access to information and instruction, but for deeper learning there is a need to have activities embedded in appropriate conceptual tasks. Within these tasks, subject specific skills will be called upon requiring subject specific softwares (Bates, 2011). Cognitive tools support simulation, manipulation of variables, and opportunities to test hypotheses in a safe and non-challenging environment (Candy, 2004). This may be as simple as graphing calculators, spreadsheets, or concept maps, or as complex as ecological or engineering simulations. In this way, digital technologies support thinking, processing, and the amplification of knowledge (Candy, 2004).

Affective Learning Higher education has traditionally maintained a strong focus on cognitive outcomes, however knowledge is never value-free (Chalkley, 2006). Affective learning is generally embedded in the generic attributes of many courses in higher education programs as they contribute to employability and successful participation in the workplace. Whilst these are broadly formulated in the institutional learning strategy, they are potentially by-products of learning, audited and identified after the course design is complete. The link between ability and behaviour is often not clearly articulated when assessing student outcomes (Chalkley, 2006). Nonetheless, academics and course designers often consider affective outcomes when they develop their pedagogical strategies to support learning. In the education context, there is a need for consistency between the attitudes and values recognizable in the curriculum, and those characteristics as exhibited in the profession. In preparing pre-service teachers for their professional roles, any course they participate in must model responsiveness to attitudes and emotional states, something less difficult in a face to face situation. If we value equally affective and cognitive outcomes in online learning, and to the way that outcomes “shape individuals and societies” (Russell, 2006, p 6). Strategies should be examined to identify affective nuances through close attention to interactions and artefacts generated by students. Whilst it is claimed that the distancing effect of online education will never be overcome, the use of regular, synchronous video-conferencing links, and face to face meetings where possible, can serve to more closely monitor the attitudes and progress of learners (Russell, 2006). In particular, tools that are able to monitor students’ emotions and feelings, such as ‘thumbs up’, smiley faces are able to reduce the distancing effect of online learning (McGovern and Barnes, 2009).

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

69

With this in mind, a reconceptualization of the value system underpinning the design of on-line learning is critical (Russell, 2006), together with a clear identification of the affective factors supported and developed throughout a course.

Sensori-Motor Learning Dettmer (2006) stresses that the senses are avenues for concept formation, problem solving, and experiences as they nurture intellectual skills. Sensory input in online environments is diverse, ranging from differences in colour, placement, formatting and organization, to the stimulus provided by images, sound, and animations or video (Ally, 2008). Highly active learning is also supported through gaming, interactive learning objects and participating in virtual worlds. For adult learners, this often adds new affordances to their traditional text-based learning environments. These affordances can provide immersive and active learning experiences rich in sensory input.

Socio-Cultural Learning Using the capacity of Web 2.0 tools involves a new mindset – from consumption of resources to the generation of resources and artefacts, and the creation of new knowledge whilst also supporting personal sense-making and reflection (Bryant, 2007; Downes, 2007) . The collective intelligence of groups can be harnessed to generate ideas that are fresher, richer, and more sophisticated than the contribution of individual users. The real power of Web 2.0 is its capacity to support collaborative and social learning in which learners actively co-construct knowledge as part of a dynamic learning community. Already addressed in previous sections is the importance of an authentic, problem-based task within which learning is a socio-cultural dialogic. From the perspective of both learner and teacher, the transparency of online learning is vital (Dalsgaard and Paulsen, 2009). Learners leave permanent digital records of their activities, as text, sound, images and video, so scrutiny and monitoring is possible by teachers and peers. Through the validation of individual ideas against those of others, , learners extend their knowledge through social interaction in seeking a solution to a problem. Ultimately learning is, however, individual. This emphasizes the importance of the social aspect of learning, and the learner as “self”. If this is what learners want, design and tool selection should be to support both social interaction and learning interactions with interchangeability of purpose with the tools provided (Creanor and Trinder, 2010). Group activity online is well supported in the democratic environment of a wiki. Careful scaffolding and modelling can be useful in this case, with online collaboration being selfmaintained rather than being directly supervised by the teacher (Benfield and De Laat, 2010). Networked learning and networks are essential to support learning. ICT promotes collaborative or cooperative connections between learners, learners and tutors, and learners and learning resources to enhance the efficacy of learning (Cameron, 2009). Both weak and strong ties are important, the former to diversify the perspectives available to the learner, the latter to deepen critical analysis of these perspectives (Benfield and De Laat, 2010).

70

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

Three levels of social interactivity mediated by technology may be observed online (Bates, 2011). Firstly, individuals may use social software tools to manage personal information only, with none of the networking functions being activated. While this is able to be shared, it is not a primary goal. Secondly, communication is enabled through aggregation of ideas and resources in online spaces. Finally, social software can be used to support genuine social networking in which the power of the network can leverage the power of many (Bates, 2011). Furthermore, this connectivity, communication and collaboration can be supported in both synchronous and asynchronous ways; thus supporting learning across boundaries of time and place. The patterns of collaboration and communication may differ within and between discipline areas to meet the needs of the subject and the learning needs of all students (Cook, 2006). For instance, collaborative tools are not as commonly used in the Sciences as in the Humanities (Cameron, 2009; Cook, 2006). Communication is important in the social community and represents the feelings of its members regarding connectedness, interdependence and sense of belonging. Many students may experience isolation which may result in feeling marginalised and disenfranchised (Jones, Chew, Jones, and Lau, 2009). An individual connecting to other learners is most important to promote avenues for engagement networking amongst the learning community members (Duncan and Young, 2009). Providing a physical presence through voice and video is critical to learners, with regular feedback to them about the way they are meeting course expectations critical (Duncan and Young, 2009).

LEARNING IS BEST SUPPORTED THROUGH CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT OF ASSESSMENT, CURRICULUM AND PEDAGOGY ● ● ●

Learning should be by design The design should demonstrate clear alignment with theoretical underpinnings The design should demonstrate clear alignment between what is stated as the outcomes, the content and pedagogy, and the demonstration of learning. This should include alignment between the modality and context of learning

When investigating online learning in a focussed way, four interrelated processes emerge (de Freitas and Conole, 2010), namely: thinking and reflecting; conversation and interaction; experience and activity; and evidence and demonstration. The design implications emerging from these process are the requirement for an online learning environment to provide space, resources and support for active immersion in learning materials, personal online space for thinking and reflecting, online spaces for conversations and interaction in collaborative learning, and individualised opportunities to develop demonstrations of student knowledge and evidence them with designed and creative artefacts. Decisions about learning design cannot occur without a prior examination of theory. There should be consistency between the alignment of curriculum, teaching methods, learning environment and assessment procedures (Biggs, 2012). When defining a course outcome, there are implicit assumptions about what is important (Mayes and de Freitas, 2007). Therefore, clear design principles are essential to promote course expectations.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

71

An example of a course that was redesigned using clear design principles to make explicit intended outcomes, the learning activities and assessment for the course is described by Sharpe and Oliver (2007). One design principle explicitly identified was that the tutor in certain activities was to be approached only as a last resort, and furthermore, access was restricted to those students who had engaged with the online environment. Peer support groups formed, and tutorials became intense experiences of non-trivial problems. Thus, as a design principle, students were expected to engage regularly and routinely, to establish good study habits (Stubbs, Martin, and Endlar, 2006). As social constructivism is the framework implicit in our design, students will work beyond the content and discipline-specific thinking processes, and develop information literacy skills in effectively finding, evaluating and creating information. Biggs (2012) uses the term “constructive alignment” to indicate that in his view the guiding assumptions about learning should be based on constructivist theory. Beyond search and retrieval, we promote supporting students in contextualizing, analysing, visualising and synthesizing information (Jenkins, Purushotma, Clintin, Weigel, and Robison, 2006; Lorenzo and Dziuban, 2006) . By encouraging learners to use learner-generated content, they are supported in intellectual ownership (Bates, 2011). Beyond alignment with theory, the principles of constructive alignment (Biggs, 2003) should be explicitly applied in the learning design of online courses. This approach requires direct alignment of stated outcomes, student assessment and the learning outcomes demonstrated by students (Biggs, 2003). In a constructivist learning environment, this entails a focus on deep transformation of knowledge rather than mere recall of facts (Walsh, 2007). The outcome of constructive alignment is likely to be more active engagement of learners in the learning process (Biggs, 2003). Furthermore, pedagogical approaches should reflect a constructivist approach, implying that interactive, collaborative learning should replace didactic lecture-based presentations. Finally, the alignment should occur within an authentic context so that functional knowledge is demonstrated by learners (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Meaningful linkages connecting learner experience and professional practice through connections between knowledge, skills and practice should be explicit. Organization and pre-planning are vital. The provision of a clear roadmap is essential online so that students can easily locate all materials on the course website, as well as obvious step by step instructions on tasks and assignments, comprehensible learning objectives and detailed criteria on marking and grading. Accumulating course materials supports learners in directing their own learning, and if learning is to be interactive, then students must complete their tasks within a bounded timeframe (Duncan and Young, 2009)

LEARNING IS BEST WHEN ACTIVITIES ARE PURPOSEFUL AND ALIGNED WITH ASSESSMENT ●

Activities should explicitly contribute to assessment and involve full participation

In terms of their selection of technologies, learners require strong justification to embrace new technologies (Creanor and Trinder, 2010). Many are learning-oriented, others are goal-

72

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

oriented and will do only what is required to demonstrate learning outcomes (Candy, 2004). Thus, it is important that activities are meaningfully aligned with assessment to support full participation. Whilst technologies are increasing in use in higher education institutions, their use for assessment is not aligned. For instance, academics have reported using closed multiple choice quizzes to assess creativity (McNeill and Gosper, 2010). Generally tools are used to assess knowledge in traditional ways with little creative use of technology for assessment (McNeill, Gosper and Hedberg, 2010). Technology enhanced learning should unquestionably change assessment. By changing the nature of the learning process and what can be learned, technology enhanced outputs inevitably challenge conventional forms of assessment and lead to requirements for different kinds of assessment (Schoonenboom and Levene, 2007). If we are expecting learners to become co-participants in a knowledge-building process in a learning community, we need to simulate and match the demands of the workplace environment, which requires different assessment that extends beyond recall and demonstration of skills (Laurillard, Oliver, Wasson, and Hoppe, 2009).

CONCLUSION The way students learn today has changed radically as they engage and interact with multiple sources of information. This situation requires a holistic online course design framework to ensure pedagogical consistency that utilises technology to motivate and actively involve students as they participate in individual and collaborative learning spaces to locate and judge the reliability of information for knowledge construction. To this end, this chapter has outlined principles that need to be acknowledged and endorsed when designing courses that address the generational shift in learning which is occurring (Davidson and Goldberg, 2012). As Biggs (2012, p. 54) reminds us: “Aligning practice on the basis of what students should be doing is likely to be more fruitful than focussing only on what teachers and administrators do”

REFERENCES Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In: T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning, 2nd Ed. Athabasca: Athabasca Press. Arenas, E. (2008). Personal learning environments: Implications and challenges. Paper presented at the Lifelong learning: Reflecting on successes and framing futures. 5th International Lifelong Learning conference, Rockhampton. Armatas, C., Holt, D. and Rice, M. (2003). Impacts of an Online-Supported, Resource-Based Learning Environment: Does One Size Fit All? Distance Education, 24(2), 141-158. Bates, T. (1995). Technology, open learning and distance education. London: Routledge. Bates, T. (2011). Understanding Web 2.0 and its implications for e-learning. In: M. Lee and C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 21-42). Hershey PA: Information Science Reference.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

73

Barnes, C. and Tynan, B. (2007). The adventures of Miranda in the brave new world: Learning in a Web 2.0 millennium. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 15(3), 189200. Beetham, H. and Oliver, M. (2010). The changing practices of knowledge and learning In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 155-169). London: Routledge. Benfield, G. and De Laat, M. (2010). Collaborative knowledge building In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 184-198). London: Routledge. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. 2nd Ed. Berkshire: SRHE and Open University Press. Biggs, J. (2012). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 31 (1), 39-55. Boulos, M., Maramba, I. and Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/ 1472-6920-6-41.pdf Bower, M., Hedberg, J. and Kuswara, A. (2009). Conceptualising Web 2.0 enabled learning designs. Paper presented at the Ascilite 2009, Auckland. Brown, J. and Duguid, P. (2000). Balancing act: How to capture knowledge without killing it. Harvard Business Review, May-June, p. 3-7 Bryant, L. (2007). Emerging trends in social software for education. Emerging Technologies for learning. Retrieved from http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/pate_ documents/research/emerging_technologies07_chapter1.pdf Candy, P. (2004). Linking thinking: self-directed learning in the digital age. Retrieved from http://www.voced.edu.au/docs/dest/TD_AG_80_02.pdf Cameron, L. (2009). Using generic learning designs to promote good teaching and learning practice. Paper presented at the Ascilite 2009, Auckland. Chalkley, B. (2006). Education for Sustainable Development: Continuation. [Article]. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(2), 235-236. Conole, G., de Laat, M., Dillon, T., and Darby, J. (2007). 'Disruptive technologies', 'pedagogical innovation': What's new? Findings from an in-depth study of students' use and perception of technology. Computers and Education, 50(2), 511-524. Cook, J. (2006). Symposium - Design in the disciplines. Paper presented at the JISC Innovating e-Learning 2006: Transforming Learning Experiences Online Conference Creanor, L. and Trinder, K. (2010). Managing study and life with technology. In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 43-55). London: Routledge. Czerniewicz, L. and Brown, C. (2010). Strengthening and weakening boundaries: Students negotiating technology mediated learning In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 142-152). London: Routledge. Dalsgaard, C. and Paulsen, M. (2009). Transparency in cooperative online education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10 (3), 1-22. Davidson, C. and Goldberg, D. (2012). Our digital age: Implications for learning and its(online) institutions. E-Learning and Digital Media, 9 (3), 249-266

74

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

De Freitas, S. and Conole, G. (2010). The influence of pervasive and integrative tools on learners’ experiences and expectations of study In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 15-30). London: Routledge. Dettmer, P. (2006). New Blooms in established fields: Four domains of learning and doing. Roeper Review, 28 (2), 70-78. Downes, S. (2007). Learning networks in practice. Emerging Technologies for learning. Retrieved from http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/ research/emerging_technologies07_chaoter2.pdf Duncan, H. and Young, S. (2009). Online pedagogy and practice: Challenges and strategies. The Researcher, 22(1), 7-32. Fiedler, S. and Pata, K. (2009). Distributed learning environments and social software: In search for a framework of design. In: S. Hatzipanagos and S. Warburton (Eds.), Handbook of research on social software and developing community ontologies (pp. 145158). Hershey, PA, US: IGI Global. Goodyear, P. and Ellis, R. A. (2008). University students' approaches to learning: rethinking the place of technology. Distance Education, 29(2), 141 - 152. Goodyear, P. and Ellis, R. (2010). Expanding conceptions of study, context and educational design In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 100-113). London: Routledge. Gosper, M. JOLE position paper: Models for online, distance, flexible and blended learning. Retrieved from http://www.deakin.edu.au/itl/assets/resources/research-eval/projects/altcole/papers/models-final.pdf Hemmi, A., Bayne, S. and Land, R. (2009). The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 19-30. Horsley, M., Knight, B. A. and Huntly, H. (2010). The role of textbooks and other teaching and learning resources in higher education in Australia: Change and continuity in supporting learning. International Association for Research on Textbooks and Education (IARTEM) e-Journal, 3 (2), 43 – 61. Hung, D. and Chen, D. (2001). Situated cognition, Vygotskian thought and learning from the communities of practice perspective: Implications for the design of web-based e-learning. Educational Media International, 38, 1, 3-12 Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clintin, K., Weigel, M., and Robison, A. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Retrieved from www.projectnml.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf Jones, N., Chew, E., Jones, C., and Lau, A. (2009). Over the worst or at the eye of the storm? Education and Training, 51(1), 6-22. Johnson, L., Levine, A. and Smith, R. (2009). Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Churchward, A., Gray, K., and Krause, K. (2008). First year students' experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australiasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108-122. Kirkup, G. and Kirkwood, A. (2005). Information and communications technologies (ICT) in higher education teaching - a tale of gradualism rather than revolution. Learning, Media and Technology, 30(2), 185-199.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

75

Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching - A framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Oxford, UK: RoutledgeFalmer. Laurillard, D. (2006). E-Learning in higher education. In: P. Ashwin (Ed.), Changing higher education: The development of learning and teaching. London: Routledge. Laurillard, D. (2007). Foreword: Rethinking pedagogy for the digital age. In: H. Beetham and R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering elearning (pp. xv-xvii). London: Routledge. Laurillard, D., Oliver, M., Wasson, B., and Hoppe, U. (2009). Implementing technologyenhanced learning. In: N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder and S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 289-206). New York: SpringerVerlag. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lorenzo, G. and Dziuban, C. (2006). Ensuring the net generation is net savvy. Educause Learning Initiative Paper 2. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI 3006.pdf Luckin, R., Logan, K., Clark, W., Graber, R., Oliver, M., and Mee, A. (2008). Learners use of Web 2.0 technologies in and out of school in key stages 3 and 4. Coventry: Becta. Marshall, L. and Rowland, F. (1993). A guide to learning independently 2nd Ed. Buckingham: Open University. Mason, R. and Rennie, F. (2008). E-Learning and social networking handbook. New York: Routledge. Massingham, P. and Herrington, T. (2006). Does attendance matter? An examination of student attitudes, participation, performance and attendance. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 3(2), 82-103. Mayes, T. and de Freitas, S. (2007). Learning and e-learning. The role of theory. In: H. Beetham and R. Sharpe, (Eds.) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Designing and delivering e-learning (pp.13-25). London: Routledge McGovern, N. and Barnes, K. (2009). Lectures from My Living Room: A Pilot Study of Hybrid Learning from the Students’ Perspective. In: F. Wang, J. Fong, L. Zhang and V. Lee (Eds.), Hybrid Learning and Education (Vol. 5685, pp. 284-298): Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. McLoughlin, C. and Lee, M. (2011). Pedagogy 2.0: Critical challenges and responses to Web 2.0 and social software in tertiary teaching. In: M. Lee and C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social infomatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 43-69). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. McNeill, M. and Gosper, M. (2010). Technoplogies to transform assessment: A study of learning outcomes, assessment and technology use in an Australian university. Paper presented at the Ascilite 2010, Sydney. McNeill, M., Gosper, M. and Hedberg, J. (2010).Academic practice in aligning learning outcomes, assessment strategies and technologies: Joining the dots (or not). In: M. B. Nunes and M. McPherson (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference eLearning (Vol. 1, pp. 129-138). Freiburg, Germany: IADIS Oblinger, D. and Oblinger, J. (2005). Educating the Net Generation. Boulder: Educause

76

Wendy Fasso, Cecily Knight and Bruce Allen Knight

Rosie, A. (2001). Online pedagogies and the promotion of 'deep learning'. Journal of Information Services and Use, 20(2-3), 109-116. Russell, G. (2006). The distancing question in online education. Innovate Journal of Online Education. Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=articleand id=13 Ryberg, T. and Dirckinck-Holmfield, L. (2010). Analysing digital literacy in action: A case study of a problem-oriented learning process. In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 170-183). London: Routledge. Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan Page. Savin-Baden, M. (2008). From cognitive capability to social reform? Shifting perceptions of learning in immersive irtual worlds. Research in Learning Technology, 16(3), 151-161. Schoonenboom, J. and Levene, M. (2007). Introduction: The perfect start for a trail. In: J. Schoonenboom, M. Levene, J. Heller, K. Keenoy and M. Turcsanyi-Szabo (Eds.), Trails in education: Technologies that support navigatoinal learning (1 ed., pp. 1-10). Amsterdam: Sense Publishers. Seely Brown, J. and Adler, R. (2008). Minds on fire: Opoen education, the long tail, and learning 2.0. Educause Review, 43(1), 16-32. Sharpe, R. and Beetham, H. (2010). Understanding students’ uses of technology for learning: Towards creative appropriation. In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 1-12). London: Routledge. Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., de Freitas, S., and Conole, G. (2010). An introduction to rethinking learning for a digital age. In: R. Sharpe, H. Beetham and S. de Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age. London: Routledge. Sharpe, R. and Oliver, M. (2007). Designing courses for e-learning. In: H. Beetham and R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing and delivering elearning. London: Routledge. Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L. and MacDonald, C. J. (2006). Learners' Perspectives on what is Missing from Online Learning: Interpretations through the Community of Inquiry Framework, 7 (3), 1-24. Stubbs, M., Martin, I. and Endlar, L. (2006). The structuration of blending learning: Putting holistic design principles into practice. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 163-175. Thomas, M. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 351-366. Valjataga, T. and Fiedler, S. (2008). Competence advancement supported by social media Paper presented at the Special track on technology support for self-organised learners. Valtajaga, T., Pata, K. and Tammets, K. (2011). Considering students' perspectives on personal and distributed learning environments in course design. In: M. Lee and C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp 85-107). New York: Information Science Reference. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press. Walsh, A. (2007). An exploration of Biggs' constructive alignment in the context of workbased learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(1), 79-87.

A Design Framework for Enhancing On-Line Learning

77

Woo, K., Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Preston, G., Green, D., and Phillips, R. (2008). Webbased lecture technologies: Blurring the boundaries Alt-J Research in Learning, 16(2), 81-93. Wrede, O. (2003). Weblogs and discourse: Weblogs as a transformational technology for higher education and academic research. Paper presented at the Blogtalk Conference, Vienna, 23-24 May. http://owrede.khm.de/publications/weblogs_and_discourse_backup

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 6

A STUDY OF FACTORS INFLUENCING SUCCESS IN AN INTRO TO ENGLISH LINGUISTICS Rebecca Babcock1, Suzanne Rathbun1, Jack Nichols2, Julie McCown3 and Amanda McCain4 1

UT Permian Basin, Odessa, TX, US 2 Odessa, TX, US 3 UT Arlington, Arlington, TX, US 4 Texas A&M Commerce, Commerce, TX, US

ABSTRACT At the University of Texas Permian Basin, students exhibited varying levels of success in an introduction to English linguistics course. In order to investigate this phenomenon, researchers measured various factors that may have influenced success in this course. Researchers used the Nelson-Denny reading test, surveys, interviews, and grades to determine levels of success. After measuring for several factors such as time at tutoring, time reading or studying, and attitudes, the one standout factor related to success in the course as measured by grades was reading level with tutoring as a complicating factor. Our results imply that intro to linguistics courses should carry a minimum reading level of 13 as a prerequisite, and require tutoring for those who fall below the level (1012). Students with an overall reading level below tenth grade should be discouraged from taking these courses.

Introduction to English linguistics is a historically difficult course at the University of Texas Permian Basin. The course, called The English Language, is a junior-level course that covers aspects of English language linguistics including but not limited to phonetics; phonology; morphology; syntax; semantics; stylistics; discourse; dialects and varieties; global Englishes; the history of English; lexicography; social factors such as region, age, race, class, ethnicity and gender; and other relevant topics. Undergraduate ESL/Bilingual minors are required to take this course, and it meets requirements for English majors, Child & Family Studies majors, and Multidisciplinary Studies majors. After teaching the course in 2005 and

80

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

2006, Babcock noticed marked differences in achievement among students in the course. She decided to investigate the factors for success, which included the personal qualities students needed to succeed in a required class with difficult material. This article reports the results of a research project designed to measure the factors that students bring with them to the course that influence success. When the investigation began, these questions were open and researchers did not have a preconceived hypothesis of what we would find. The fact that reading level and attendance at tutoring emerged as the most relevant factors is further support for the previous literature finding these issues as keys to success in other college courses. Determining the factors needed for success is important because The English Language covers a great deal of material that many students find difficult. The reading load is not exceptionally heavy, but it is done independently, without the support of lectures. Twice a week homework activities are assigned that are highly dependent on reading skills. When grading the homework, Babcock found that several students failed to answer the questions as asked, leading her to suspect they did not comprehend the material. Also, several students with low reading skills plagiarized on homework, exams, and papers by copying word-forword from the textbook or an internet source instead of composing their own work. During tutoring and study groups, graduate assistants and supplemental instruction leaders went over the material from the chapters. One graduate assistant reported having to “break things down to their basic roots” because Many students seem to lack the rudimentary elements and have some form of floating mid-knowledge. It sounds bizarre, but it seems that they only understand the mid-range of English and I would have to break it down to almost verb/noun level. In this specific class, many were ESL students and while I was trying to help them with phonetics they were more interested in what they felt they were lacking. Some students just needed what the chapters were presenting, and they needed to understand how to read an instructional book. The contents seemed overwhelming at first. As I helped them work through the book, they became more comfortable with the text. It was as if the contents of the book was a stepping stone to their real problems. (Eileen Peters, personal communication)

Another graduate assistant who conducted study sessions focused primarily on completing homework rather than reviewing course material. He reported that he first would wait for students to arrive at the study session, and then when they did arrive, they would ask for help with whatever problems they felt they would need assistance with from their current homework First they might ask, "Would you help me with this particular problem?" I would immediately look or ask to see what they had so far. If they had some work done, I'd look over their work. If the answer was wrong, then I'd begin to question why they thought that was the appropriate answer. From there, we'd be able to find the answer they were looking for. If the answer was correct, I'd tell them they had it right. Now, if they had not answered the question yet, I'd ask them to come up with an answer first. If their reply was, "I don't even know where to start," then we'd look at the question together. I'd usually, or they would, read the question aloud. From there, I was able to reference back to a point in class when [the professor] had gone over the material, which was usually the day of. I never had the study sessions before class, so the students were usually there to do the current homework from the same day. And

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics

81

no one ever came in on the non-class day (Friday). (Jason Dominguez, personal communication).

We wanted to find the factors that make this course difficult for some students, while others completed it with relative ease. The issue could be with the amount or type of content and the independent reading required. Since we had no preconceptions about what the factors may have been, in the first iteration of the study the primary researcher asked students about several factors, including outside work, time spent studying, and whether they had a friend in the class. See Appendix A for the variety of questions that were asked. Unfortunately the response was too small to do a statistical analysis on the survey results. After doing this preliminary work we found the factor that most closely related final course grades was reading level. Those with a graduate-school reading level had little trouble with the course, while those with lower reading scores required extreme effort to succeed, if they could succeed at all. Having noticed this factor after the preliminary results from Summer ‘07, in the Fall of ’07 Babcock encouraged those with a reading level below 12th grade to attend tutoring. Since tutoring appears to have a positive effect, the amount and type of tutoring may also be a factor, and this is something that will be the focus of a future study.

LITERATURE REVIEW A literature review is difficult to write for an exploratory study that lacked an initial hypothesis. Here we attempt to relate the factors we explored to factors others have studied as well. Although there have been previous studies that looked at reading tests, tutoring, and motivation and their relationship to college course success, especially in writing, we found little that related specifically to courses in linguistics.

Reading Tests Spiller and Hall (1978) examined the efficacy of reading tests, specifically the NelsonDenny Reading Test (NDRT), in predicting academic success in community college English courses and found that “there is a positive relationship (r = .11 to r = .27) between reading test scores and grades received in the English courses” (p. 6). The small positive relationship could possibly be attributed to the fact that “the English courses used in the sample were primarily courses emphasizing composition rather than reading. […] As might be expected, the more important role reading plays in a course, the better the reading test scores correlate with course grades” (p. 6). Spiller and Hall also noted that those students with low reading test scores “did not improve enough on their own to succeed in subsequent classes” (p. 7). This finding suggests that outside intervention is needed in order for students with low reading test scores to succeed in reading-intensive courses. Gerow and Murphy (1980) conducted a similar study, assessing “the extent of the relationship between Nelson-Denny Reading Test (NDRT) scores and introductory psychology examination scores” (p. 553). Their results showed a median correlation between NDRT scores and introductory psychology examination scores of approximately 0.56 (Gerow & Murphy, 1980, p. 555). When standardized test scores were not available, Gerow and

82

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

Murphy recommended the NDRT as a useful substitute in predicting the academic performance in introductory psychology classes. However, they were careful to point out that, since “the NDRT is at best able to account for roughly 20 to 45% of the variance in class grades, explorations for additional predictor variables that individually or collectively could enhance the predictability of success in introductory psychology courses should continue” (p. 555). Similar to the findings of Gerow and Murphy (1980), Erwin (1981) found that the NDRT was a suitable substitute for the SAT-Verbal in predicting college grades, adding that the NDRT is a more convenient and economical alternative. Wood (1982) also supported the finding that the NDRT can be used in place of standardized tests, such as the SAT and ACT, in predicting college freshmen grades and that the validity of the NDRT’s predictive function increases when combined with high school GPA, which is identified as the “most valid, single predictor of freshmen grades” (p. 579). Additionally, Royer, Marchant, Sinatra, and Lovejoy (1990), Baron and Norman (1992), and Hudson, McPhee, and Petrosko (1993) have all found a correlation between reading test scores and academic performance in college courses. King, Rasool, and Judge (1994) pointed to other variables as potentially more predictive of college performance than SAT and NDRT scores, which they found not to be significant in predicting success in reading-intensive courses. They suggested several possible explanations for why these test scores were not good predictors including the importance of other factors such as “student motivation, professor’s teaching style, or the features of a college (i.e. small classes or emphasis on teaching rather than research)” as well as “course load, class size, student learning style, and teaching skill” (p. 11).

Tutoring Since we did not begin with a hypothesis but tested several possible factors in success, we included attendance at tutoring sessions as a possible factor. Previous research has shown that tutoring can improve the academic performance of both tutors and tutees (Juel, 1996). Tutoring has been shown to benefit students’ academic performance in a number of ways including keeping them from becoming frustrated and assisting them in completing work in less time (Merrill, Reisterr, Merrill, & Landes, 1995). Along with tutoring, supplemental instruction (SI) has been found to be an important component in students’ academic success. A study conducted by Blanc, DeBuhr, and Martin (1983) concluded that supplemental instruction was utilized by high-risk students and resulted in improved academic performance and retention. Supplemental instruction is particularly useful in courses “in which the subject matter is inherently difficult and presents a challenge even when taught by a skilled teacher to motivated students” (Wolfe, 1987, p. 232). However, Visor, Johnson and Cole (1992) found that students with positive self-esteem, internal locus of control and high self-efficacy were more likely to be regular participants at SI sessions. Students who needed extra help most were least likely to attend sessions, or if they did attend, they did not persevere.

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics

83

Motivation In addition to reading level and attendance at tutoring and SI sessions, another important factor in academic performance is student motivation. In a study of Developmental Education Biology Students and academic motivation, Moore (2007) concluded that academic motivation, more so than extra credit work, resulted in higher grades and that “Innate intelligence is of little use unless it is accompanied by motivation” (p. 32). Schunk (1991) maintained that while motivation and self-efficacy were related, “High self-efficacy will not produce competent performances when requisite skills are lacking” (p. 209).

METHODS In Summer and Fall 2007 a research team consisting of the lead investigator, a demographer, a statistician and three assistants1 began data collection and got informed consent on the first day of classes. The final data set consists of Babcock’s sections from Summer 2007, Fall 2007, and Fall 2008, and 53 students from these sections (Summer ’07 n=20, Fall ’07 n=7 and Fall ’08 n=27) provided the participant pool for this research. Participants included 11 males and 42 females. Three ethnic backgrounds were identified: Hispanic (n=26), African American (n=1), Caucasian (n=23), and non-responding (n=3). From the available data, 13 participants had received course prerequisites from local junior colleges and 1 from an area University. Participants were not provided with incentives for their participation. We chose which factors to study through introspection (a common method in linguistics), consulting with colleagues, and checking several articles (i.e. Mertens, 1990). The information collected was the reading level (as reported by the NDRT) and self-reported data such as the amount of time spent on the course and outside factors such as family and work responsibilities. We also asked about socioeconomic level and whether or not they had a friend in the class. In addition, we looked at time spent on various class activities including reading, homework, and study sessions, and also gathered data on ethnicity (as determined by the researcher), gender, major, and prerequisites. The Fall 2008 students were also asked about their first language after the initial analysis showed Hispanics trended toward lower reading levels. The primary investigator decided to conduct the study with an assistant so the students would feel comfortable being open with their responses. The assistant met with students and got their informed consent. They took the Nelson-Denny reading test in class on the first day of the semester and were asked to fill out an online survey at the end of the semester. Students were also asked to keep a time log of their class activities. The assistant then conducted unstructured follow-up interviews. She attempted to contact all students from the Fall ’06 group, but none of these chose to complete any activities associated with the study. As a result we then decided to study the Summer and Fall ’07 courses, both in-class, with a followup cohort of the Fall 2008 class.

1

In addition to the listed authors, Eileen Peters and Sherry McKibben were members of this team.

84

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

The data consists of Nelson Denny reading scores (reading level, vocabulary, and total scores), journal entries, an online survey, and one-on-one interviews. Out of twenty-four students in the summer 2007 course, twenty volunteered to participate in the study, five of whom dropped the course. Out of the remaining fifteen participants, six answered the online questionnaire and two completed interviews. Of the seven students in the fall 2007 class, there were five participants, four of whom did interviews and only one of whom filled out the online survey, resulting in a total of twenty grades and reading scores, seven surveys and six interviews. For fall 2008 there were twenty-seven participants, twenty-two of whom took the reading test, and one of whom withdrew, making a total of 41 participants with both grades and reading scores.

RESULTS Although the data does not lend itself to generalizeable conclusions, here we will point out trends. We have treated these results as a pilot study to alert us to the factors that we need to study and those of less importance. For instance, Babcock thought time spent on the course would be a factor in student success. It became clear through the preliminary data collection that time spent on the course did not seem to be a factor, nor did completion of all reading assignments. We did notice, however, that reading score seemed to be an important predictive factor, and attendance at tutoring and study sessions seemed to help those students who otherwise might not have succeeded. This study examined 53 university students in three school sessions (Summer ’07 n=20, Fall ’07 n=7 and Fall ’08 n=27) to determine the factors associated with success. We looked at reading levels for all three semesters, and since we suspected that attendance at tutoring sessions may have been a factor, we recorded those numbers for the Fall ’07 and ’08 cohorts. Of the five students with reading levels below grade 9, two earned Cs and three earned Fs. Those who earned Cs attended numerous study sessions and tutoring sessions. Seven students had reading levels of grades 10, 11, and 12; all these passed. Students with college reading levels or above tended to do well, even without completing all the readings or spending a great deal of time on the class. Out of the 41 participants with both grades and reading scores, nine had reading levels above 17.9. Seven of these students got As, one got a C and one got a D. In addition, all the students who got As had reading levels of 10th grade and above. Students with reading scores above grade 12 who completed the course all got As and Bs with two exceptions. Students who got Fs had the lowest average reading scores (9.2). Table 1. Grades by reading level Grades A B C D F

Min 10.3 12.3 4.1 14.6 5.8

Max 18.9 17.3 18.4 18.8 13.9

Mean/SD 16.06/3.15 15.5/1.7 12.2/4.9 16.7/2.9 9.2/4.2

n= 15 10 11 2 3

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics

85

Table 2. Grades by study sessions Grades A B C D F

None 3 7 4 4 0

Some 2 1 6 0 2

Many 2 1 0 0 0

Table 1 indicates the overall results of the reading levels and final course grades of the students. Students who received F’s (n=3) in the course had lower reading levels than those who received A’s-D’s (Table I). The question of whether or not the number of study sessions attended was related to reading grade level was also addressed. Those few students with low reading levels who attended more than one study session attained better grades than those with lower reading levels who atteneded none. (See Table 2). Results indicated that students with higher reading levels tended to make better grades in the course than those students with lower reading levels, and students who attend study sessions improved their course grade regardless of reading level.

DISCUSSION This study produced more questions than answers, as so much more than reading level goes into the grades in a class. While the sample was not large enough to formulate generalizable results, there are some trends that we’d like to discuss. After collecting data for a few semesters we have realized how important reading skill is to success in courses in linguistics. Each semester Babcock offers extra tutoring sessions with both a Graduate Teaching Assistant and a Supplemental Instruction Leader. Yet students still struggle and all that could benefit do not take advantage of study sessions. A future qualitative study could investigate students’ reading and study habits to determine what specific behaviors are conducive to success. It is tempting to establish a minimum reading score as a prerequisite for the course, but this seems impractical. Very few students filled out the online surveys or completed the interview process; however, the students who did so received either As or Bs. This tends to show that students who are not successful in the course do not follow up on research activities, or even that students who are not successful are less motivated in general. Perhaps successful students are exceptionally motivated. Williams & Takaku (2011) found that it was not motivation but help-seeking behavior that correlated with visiting the writing center and improved grades. Students with As appeared to be those who had a high reading level without necessarily putting in excessive hours, those with moderate reading levels who put in extra hours of studying, or those who attended tutoring and study sessions. Students who failed appeared to be those with reading levels below grade 9 who did not seek help. Of the four students in the summer class who completed the course with a failing grade, one stopped attending and the other three plagiarized. Only one student who plagiarized was a study participant, and her reading score was 5.8. It appears that students who cannot understand the material they read

86

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

become panicked and then plagiarize as a last desperate act. It seems almost cruel to expect students with an elementary reading level to complete college-level work, and although disturbing, the plagiarism is not surprising. Upon repeating the course, this student plagiarized again, and still has not finished her course work.2 Table 3. Grades by reading level male and female Grades A B C D F

Reading level male 15.9 17.7 11.0 18.8 13.9

Reading level female 15.9 13.5 14.6 6.8

Table 4. Ethnicity by overall reading level mean and gender reading level mean Ethnicity Caucasian Hispanic African American

Reading Level Mean 16.3 12.5 11.1

Male Mean 15.8 14.6 11.1

Female Mean 16.9 12.1

Table 5. Grade by ethnicities mean reading level Grade A B C D F

Caucasian 17.3 15.23 17.6 18.1 13.9

Hispanic 14.2 15.21 9.1 14.6 6.9

African American

11.1

At first we thought that whether the student took the prerequisite (Sophomore Literature) at the junior college or university would have some effect. In actuality, where the prerequisite was taken did not seem to have any effect on success. There was one student who had not passed Sophomore Lit at all and was taking the prerequisite of that course (Comp II) concurrently with the ENGL 3371 course. (She had already failed Comp II once and gotten two Ds and was on her fourth attempt.) This was the student with a 5.8 grade reading level mentioned above who failed the course, mainly due to plagiarism and not accepting the help that was offered by the teacher. She explained later in an interview that English is her second language and she was never educated in Spanish. She is a generation 1.5 learner; her grandmother spoke Spanish and read to her in Spanish, and her parents both spoke English and Spanish. She was placed in an ESL program in school. She had trouble with paraphrasing but stated the writing center was helpful.

2

As of December 2011 she completed her course requirements to graduate.

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics

87

A study of the data indicated among ethnic groups Caucasians had the highest average reading level. Gender indications were white females had the highest average reading level (M = 16.9). See Table 3 for grades by reading level male and female. Students with the highest reading levels used 88% of the study sessions and tutoring overall. Hispanic students who used study sessions and tutoring benefited from their use more than any other ethnic group. See table 4 for reading scores by ethnicity. Table 5 shows that Hispanics had lower reading levels than Caucasians who achieved the same grades.

FUTURE RESEARCH From the results we have determined that topics of interest to future research will be to take a closer look at the intersection between reading levels, attendance at study sessions and tutoring and resulting course grades. These study sessions can be student led and organized, or led by the teacher, Supplementary Instruction leader, or graduate assistant. Tutoring is also offered in reading and writing through student services. Further studies could also look at race, gender, native language, and ethnicity as factors in success. An even more disturbing question is why students with such low reading levels are in junior-level courses. Due to the history of The University of Texas Permian Basin as an upper-level institution, most students in the study were transfer students. Students more than 24 hours of transfer credit are admitted with a 2.0 minimum grade point average. Further research may investigate how students with low reading levels manage to “slip through” and take upper-level courses. It may be profitable to look more closely at failing students and students with low reading scores (low reading score appears to be predictive of a C or an F depending on the level of outside help the student accesses). The difficulty will be following up on the failing students, as they tend not to participate in follow-up activities. Again, because they do not fill out surveys or participate in interviews, we don’t know if they are just not motivated or don’t care, or if they are ashamed, hurt, or bitter and don’t wish to revisit a painful experience. Closely tracking the type and amount of outside help students recieve should enable us to verify our suspicions about the relationship of reading level to ultimate outcome in the course. We will also try to determine the reason for low reading scores. Could it be ethnicity? Knowledge of English? All students with low reading scores were Hispanic, but since none of them filled out the survey, we do not know if English was their first or second language, or if there were other factors such as test bias. Minorities have lower self-efficacy beliefs (Pajares, 2003), but we did not test for this so we cannot tell if there is a relationship. Rather than have an online survey that students need to log on to fill out after the class is over, we will personally follow up with students and interview them in person or by phone. The use of an assistant is a good idea for confidentiality, but the assistant is not as motivated as the primary investigator to strongly pursue participants to get responses. We would also like to investigate the nature of the connection between attitude and motivation and success in the course or attendance at tutoring and SI sessions. In Fall '07 students who did not attend tutoring responded that they didn't have time or the hours available just weren't convenient for their schedule. In other words, they had other activities that seemed more pressing than tutoring. None of the students in the off-campus section attended reading tutoring on-campus. The director of the literacy center did not meet

88

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

personally with the students at the remote location as she did with the summer students who took the class on-campus. In summer five students attended reading tutoring. Our results imply that intro to linguistics courses should carry a minimum reading level of 13 as a prerequisite, and require tutoring for those who fall below the level (10-12). Students with an overall reading level below tenth grade should be discouraged from taking these courses. Finally, we did not look at self-efficacy, which in subsequent research we have found is a likely factor in success (Pajeres, 2003). A 2005 article by Buel and Alexander asserts that “students’ beliefs about their ability to accomplish a specific task successfully (i.e., selfefficacy) are related to their task choice, persistence, and performance” (p. 698). Systematic interventions on the part of the professor can enhance, in a limited capacity, students’ beliefs in their self-efficacy (Jackson, 2002). Future studies should measure the relationship between students’ self-efficacy beliefs and their performance in linguistics. Research designs, like teachers, need to be reflective and recursive, always changing and updating in a feedback loop as we obtain new data, we refine what we are looking for, and how we can best access that information. We are hoping to provide a positive experience for students of all levels, and the continuation of this research should help us to do that.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT Thanks to Carol Morris for editing and to Michael O. and Jason Babcock for their insightful comments. Thanks also to Babcock’s Spring 2011 online ENGL 1301 class and her online writing group for excellent feedback.

APPENDIX A: SURVEY QUESTIONS   

           

Do you feel you were successful in the course? (y/n) What was your grade? How many hours per week did you spend working on the class? (Broken down by the following categories: Online, in class, reading, studying, doing homework, researching, doing tests) Did you read all assigned materials? (if no, what percent did you read) How many times did you read the assigned materials? What outside obligations did you have and how many hours a week did these take? How many hours were you taking the semester you took 3371? Did you have the proper prerequisite? (sophomore English) Is English your first language? What is your country of birth/citizenship? Do you have a computer at home with internet access? Do you believe that the responsibility for learning is the teacher’s, student’s or both? Was the class an elective or a requirement? Did you have another reason for taking this class? What is your major and minor?

A Study of Factors Influencing Success in an Intro to English Linguistics         

89

Did you take advantage of any student services? If so, which ones? (i.e. library, writing center) Did you attempt to get help in any other way? If so, what did you do? (i.e. asked friends, teacher for help, attend study sessions) Did you attend any study sessions, either with the teacher, assistant, or other students? (You may select more than one.) What study or reading strategies did you use, if any? How did the performance of the teaching assistant affect your success in the class? Have you taken English Grammar or Spanish Linguistics? What is your preferred learning style? (auditory, kinesthetic, visual) Did you have a friend in the course? What is your socioeconomic status?

REFERENCES Baron, J., & Norman, M. F. (1992). SATs, achievement tests, and high-school class rank as predictors of college performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 1047-55. Blanc, R. A., DeBuhr, L. E., & Martin, D. C. (1983). Breaking the attrition cycle: The effects of supplemental instruction on undergraduate performance and attrition. The Journal of Higher Education, 54(1), 80-90. Buel, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2005). Motivation and performance differences in students’ domain-specific epistemological belief profiles. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 697-726. Erwin, T. D. (1981). The Nelson-Denny reading test as a predictor of college grades. Reading Psychology, 2(3), 158-64. Gerow, J. R., & Murphy D. P. (1980). The validity of the Nelson-Denny reading test as a predictor of performance in introductory psychology. Education and Psychological Measurement, 40(2), 553-6. Hudson, J. B., McPhee S. A., & Petrosko, Jr., J. (1993). The relationship between tests, course placement, and the academic performance of college freshmen. NACADA Journal, 13(2), 5-14. Jackson, J. W. (2002). Enhancing self-efficacy and learning performance. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70(3), 243-54. Juel, C. (1996). What makes literacy tutoring effective? Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 268-89. King, B. W., Rasool, J. A., & Judge, J. J. (1994). The relationship between college performance and basic skills assessment using SAT scores, the Nelson-Denny reading test and degrees of reading power. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 11(1), 5-13. Merrill, D. C., Reisterr, B.J., Merrill, S.K., & Landes, S. (1995). Tutoring: Guided learning by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 315-72.

90

Rebecca Babcock, Suzanne Rathbun, Jack Nichols et al.

Mertens, D. (1990). A conceptual model for academic achievement: Deaf student outcomes. In Moores, D. F., & Meadow-Orleans, K. P. (Eds.), Educational and developmental aspects of deafness. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. Moore, R. (2007). Academic motivation and performance of developmental education biology students. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(1), 24-34. Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 139-158. Retrieved from http://des.emory.edu/mfp/Pajares2003RWQ.pdf. Royer, J. M., Marchant, III, H. G., Sinatra, G. M., & Lovejoy, D. A. (1990). The prediction of college course performance from reading comprehension performance: evidence for general and specific prediction factors. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 158-79. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3 & 4), 207-231. Spiller, L. J., & Hall, G. L. (1978). Reading tests as predictors of academic success in community college English courses. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. Toronto, Canada. 3-8. Visor, J. N., Johnson, J. J., & Cole, L. N. (1992). The relationship of Supplemental Instruction to affect. Journal of Developmental Education, 16, 12-18. Williams, J. D., & Takaku, S. (2011). Help seeking, self-efficacy, and writing performance among college students. Journal of Writing Research, 3(1), 1-18. Retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.jowr.org/articles/ vol3_1/JoWR_2011_vol3_nr1_Williams_ Takaku.pdf Wolfe, R. F. (1987). The supplemental instruction program: Developing learning and thinking skills. Journal of Reading, 31(3), 228-32. Wood, P. H. (1982). The Nelson-Denny reading test as a predictor of college freshman grades. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42(2), 575-83.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 7

SUPPORTING STUDENT LEARNING THROUGH COLLABORATIVE ASSESSMENT TASKS Rosario Hernández University College, Dublin, Ireland

ABSTRACT The significance of student learning as a social activity often manifests itself in collaborative learning through interaction and interdependence in higher education contexts. Approaches such as Problem-Based Learning (PBL), task-based learning and project work are examples of collaborative learning. However, the translation of collaborative learning into collaborative assessment is not always successfully accomplished, and often the collaborative learning approaches are abandoned in favour of ‘individual’ assessment practices graded by academics; and, even when students are involved in collaborative assessment, their dissatisfaction is often reported in the literature. This chapter makes a case for student interaction through peer-assessment tasks as a way of supporting collaborative learning. It draws on data collected from students and faculty staff from several higher education institutions in Ireland on the subject of peer assessment. Discussion of the findings highlights that staff and students, in principle, support collaborative assessment, but its actual implementation seems to be less apparent. It is argued that failure to recognise the potential of collaborative student peer assessment tasks may be due to views of assessment held by faculty staff and by students, and to students not being sufficiently prepared for involvement in collaborative assessment. A number of proposals are suggested and substantiated by practices already implemented by the author, which are intended to move forward the current debate on the topic of collaborative assessment and pedagogical praxis.

Keywords: Collaborative assessment, student learning, student assessment

92

Rosario Hernández

INTRODUCTION A shift from a teaching to a learning paradigm (Barr and Tagg, 1995), where the focus is on what the students are learning has taken place in many higher education institutions in the last few decades. A learning paradigm can unfold itself at different levels including the aims of the institution, its program structures or the roles of faculty and students, to name a few. Expressions of this paradigm are at least twofold; first, learning is defined in terms of what students will be able to do (i.e. learning outcomes; Marsh, 2004) and second, it becomes a social activity through interaction and interdependence (Vygotsky, 1978). A curriculum based on learning outcomes has the potential to provide a cohesive structure to the teaching context where students are required to take more responsibility for their learning. This is one of the reasons why outcomes tend to be associated with a student-centred approach to teaching and learning (Biggs, 2003). Such an approach to teaching and learning entails active participation in the learning process by the students, often in collaboration with one another. Collaborative learning is becoming a common feature of students’ higher education experience (Boud, Cohen, and Sampson, 2006). It epitomises the social constructivist perspective on learning, emphasising the importance of others, including teachers as mediators of learning (Vygotsky, 1978). Collaborative learning requires students to be actively involved in the process of learning from the outset, through Problem Based Learning (PBL), project work and task-based learning. However, collaborative learning, which is often reported as conducive to learning (Bryan, 2006; Hernández, 2007c; McDowell et al., 2005), is not always successfully translated into collaborative assessment. When collaborative assessment is used, an objection is often raised about the allocation of marks to each student on the basis of group work (Bloxham and Boyd, 2007; Falchikov, 2005). Thus, concerns about collaborative assessment often surface in a number of areas including assessment of process versus final product (Orr, 2010) or issues of fairness and free-loading students (Maiden and Perry, 2011; Nordberg, 2008). These matters could lead to resistance from students and faculty staff to engage in collaborative assessment (Falchikov, 2005; Gibbs, 1999) or lack of support at institutional level (Muldoon and Lee, 2007). As a result, when it comes to assessment, collaborative learning approaches tend to be abandoned in favour of ‘individual’ assessment practices graded by faculty staff. Even when group work is assessed the involvement of students in its assessment is limited and their dissatisfaction is often reported in the literature. Falchikov argues that “grading is not the most important aspect of involving students in assessment” (2005, p. 167). Sluijsmans, Moerkerke, van Merriënboer, and Dochy, (2001) found that students are not satisfied with awarding grades to their work. Furthermore, Patton (2012) concluded that students are in favour of peer assessment as a formative exercise but are highly critical of it as a summative practice. Shifting the involvement of students to formative aspects of assessment could result in a more positive learning experience for the students than if collaborative assessment focuses on summative activities that involve students in awarding marks to each other’s work. The type of collaborative assessment proposed in this chapter potentially results in deeper individual learning as students actively engage with the comments that they award and receive from fellow students and from faculty staff.

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

93

LITERATURE REVIEW Traditionally, assessment of learning in higher education has been teacher-led. Boud (2007) argued that in the traditional discourse of assessment learners are “passive subjects” with “no other role than to subject themselves to the assessment acts of others, to be measured and classified” (p. 17). Thus, assessment that promotes learner-centred approaches is often problematic because it raises issues of power and control between students and teachers (Savin-Baden, 2004). In the literature on assessment, peer assessment is regarded as particularly relevant to ensure that students are “placed at the centre of assessment, working in partnership with academics to become autonomous and empowered in their learning” (Bain, 2010, p. 25). The literature on the use of peer assessment suggests that peer assessment generally increases student responsibility for their own learning (McDowell and Sambell, 1999). Sambell, McDowell, and Sambell (2006) argued that reducing the control of the tutor and trusting students to respond to innovative methods of assessment allows students to exercise greater learner autonomy. In addition, MacDonald’s (2011) study concluded that peer assessment is seen positively by students and is perceived to motivate, to facilitate learning, as is a fair method of assessment. Furthermore, peer assessment can enhance students’ confidence and self-esteem (Hernández, 2007a), and is crucial in the development of life-long learning qualities (Brew, 1999; Hernández, 2007a; McDowell and Sambell, 1999). Other benefits include the promotion of critical thinking (Dochy, Segers, and Sluijsmans, 1999), and the reduction of test anxiety (Ioannou and Artino, 2010). Resistance from students to becoming involved in collaborative assessment is often highlighted in the literature (Falchikov, 2005; McDowell and Sambell, 1999; Sluijsmans et al., 2001). One reason often given by students for such resistance is that they believe that it is the responsibility of the teacher to assess students’ learning (Falchikov, 2005; Patton, 2012). Students’ biases in assessing the work of their peers and their lack of knowledge on how to carry out such tasks are factors often mentioned by teachers as reasons for not involving students in the assessment of their own learning (Falchikov, 2005). However, Sambell et al. claim that often students feel they are “thrown in the deep end” (2006, p. 162) and the provision of structured and guided activities is needed during the early stages of their university studies to support them in the development of peer assessment practices. In the same way, Segers and Dochy’s study (2001) concludes that despite positive attitudes of students about collaborative assessment, there is a need to develop their skills in this field. McDowell and Sambell (1999) contend that students are in a better position to take control of their learning when they are provided with the criteria that will be used to assess their learning. However, Price and O’Donovan (2006) demonstrated that defined criteria is not enough to ensure a positive effect on students’ learning unless teachers and learners engage with the criteria in developing a common understanding. Falchikov (2005) also suggests that time be devoted to providing an explanation to the learners about their responsibilities and their role in the process of assessment. In addition to the adequate training and preparation of students for collaborative assessment, Pettigrew, Scholten, and (2011) argue that an alignment between assessment tasks and learning outcomes is essential.

94

Rosario Hernández

Falchikov (2005) further suggests that faculty staff need to establish communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) to share knowledge and obtain support from colleagues who are already committed to collaborative assessment.

CONTEXT Collaborative assessment involves the student, their peers and teacher in a critical assessment of student work. While the assessment is done collaboratively, the tasks may have been the result of individual or group work. This chapter makes a case for student interaction through a variety of assessment tasks as a way of supporting collaborative learning within this new learning paradigm. It addresses the question of how collaborative assessment tasks support learning by developing students’ capacity to evaluate the quality of their work. Two case studies, taken from classroom practices developed by the author’s work in a higher education institution illustrate how student learning can be supported through collaborative assessment activities. The case studies will be described later in the chapter. Prior to the case studies, empirical work on peer assessment will be examined in order to understand how to support students through collaborative assessment. This study was carried out during 2007-2008 with faculty staff and undergraduate students from the departments of Hispanic Studies in the seven universities in the Republic of Ireland (Table 1).

METHOD Influenced by those who promote flexible methods (Robson, 2002) that make use of data in the form of numbers as well as in the form of words, this study is based on quantitative and qualitative data collected from two questionnaires and from interviews. To maintain the anonymity of the institutions, each university has been identified by a letter, e.g. A, B, C, etc. The faculty staff cohort was drawn from two groups. The larger group comprised of all academic staff from seven departments/sections of Hispanic Studies in the universities who completed a postal questionnaire. The second group was a sub set of the participants in the questionnaire, either in their capacity as heads of department/section, or as a member of the staff nominated by the head of the department/section. They participated in a semi-structured interview carried out by the author. The student sample was drawn from those individuals who were available and/or willing to participate in the completion of the questionnaire on the day that the researcher visited their university. Table 1. Number of participants in target sample and the final sample Group Faculty Heads of subject or nominee Students

Target 68 7 138

Final 41 7 138

95

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

For the purpose of analysis, 41 completed surveys from faculty staff were classified with an ID number (S1, S2, … S41). Interviews were fully transcribed and an ID number was assigned to each interview (I1, I2, … I7) to preserve the anonymity of the participants and their institutions. Similarly, each student questionnaire was coded according to the university from which it originated (e.g. A, B, C, etc.) and was given an ID number ranging from 1 to 138. For example (D.84) refers to a reply given by a student from university D, who has been given the ID code 84. Qualitative data were coded into categories using content analysis. Only data connected to collaborative assessment has been utilised in this chapter.

FINDINGS The findings are structured into two sets. Firstly, quantitative data on the views of faculty staff and students about the involvement of students in collaborative assessment, specifically through peer assessment practices are reported. The data is from the two surveys completed by the participants (faculty staff and students). The second set of data, which arose from the surveys and from interviews conducted with a sub-group of faculty staff focuses qualitative data related to the views of faculty and students who are in favour or against the involvement of students in peer assessment practices.

Views of Faculty and Students about Student Involvement Peer Assessment Practices: Quantitative Data A 5-point Likert scale was used to elicit, in general terms, the extent to which peer (collaborative) assessment is used by faculty staff. More than half of the respondents (63.4%) indicated that they ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ involve students in peer assessment practices (Q. A1.14; Table 2). To glean an insight from the cohort of students participating in this study on their involvement in tasks related to the assessment of their learning in Hispanic Studies programs, they were asked to indicate the extent to which teachers involve the students in practices that require their engagement in the assessment of the work of their classmates (Q. A6.4). Peer assessment practices reported by the students appear to be more limited than those reported by faculty staff, with 56.5% of students stating that it is ‘never’ used and 31.2% reporting that it is ‘rarely’ used. The results are displayed in Table 3. A Likert scale (4-point) was used to request faculty staff to provide further details about the use of specific practices associated with collaborative assessment (Q. A8). Table 2. Percentage of faculty staff reporting student involvement in peer assessment Involvement of students in assessment (N= 41) ‘Peer assessment’

Never (%) 29.3

Rarely (%) 34.1

Sometimes (%) 19.5

Often (%) 17.1

Always (%) 0

96

Rosario Hernández Table 3. Percentage of students reporting their involvement in peer assessment

Involvement of students in assessment (N= 138) ‘Peer assessment’

Never (%) 56.5

Rarely (%) 31.2

Sometimes (%) 10.1

Often (%) 2.2

Always (%) 0

Table 4. Percentage of faculty staff reporting student involvement in peer assessment practices Type of student involvement in peer assessment (N= 41) ‘Orally peer to peer’ ‘Orally in groups’ ‘Written peer to a peer’ ‘Given written comments in groups’ ‘Give a grade to another student’ ‘Giving a grade in groups’

Never (%) 80.5 70.7 90.3 82.9 82.9 87.9

Rarely (%) 7.3 2.4 2.4 4.9 4.9 7.3

Sometimes (%) 0 24.4 4.0 9.8 9.8 2.4

Frequently (%) 12.2 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4

Six options were given: a) ‘one student comments orally in class on the work of a classmate’, b) ‘in groups, students comment orally on the work of a classmate or group work’, c) ‘a student comments in writing on the work of a classmate’, d) ‘in groups, students comment in writing on the work of a classmate or group work’ e) ‘a student provides a grade to the work of another student’, f) ‘in groups, they give a grade to the work of a classmate or to group work’. Additionally, there was space for the respondents to include ‘other’ types of peer assessment practices if the options provided did not cover the peer assessment practices used in their departments/sections. The only peer assessment practice that appears to be used more often comes under category b) when ‘students, in small groups comment orally on the work of a classmate or on group work’, reported as being used ‘frequently’ or ‘sometimes’ by one quarter of the respondents (26.8%). Assessing work orally, peer to peer was reported as being used ‘frequently’ by 12.2% of the participants. One reply under the ‘other’ option was ‘the whole class or group commenting on the work of a student’ (anonymous), which could be incorporated into category b). The full results are displayed in Table 4. In an attempt to establish what types of peer-assessment practices were used, the same question was included in the survey for students (Q. A8). The same six options provided in the survey for faculty staff appeared on the survey for students. Additionally, there was space for the respondents to include ‘other’ types of peer assessment practices if the options provided did not cover the peer assessment practices used in their departments/sections. The results show that the frequencies with which peer-assessment practices are used in the assessment of students’ learning are quite low regarding all the options presented to the students. Peer assessment in the form of ‘oral comments to a student’s work’ was reported as being used ‘sometimes’ and ‘frequently’ by 8.4% of the respondents and being engaged in ‘oral peer assessment in a group’ was reported as being used ‘sometimes’ and ‘frequently’ by 6.5% of the respondents. The option to provide ‘other’ types of activities that entailed peer-assessment was not utilised by any of the students. The results are displayed in Table 5.

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

97

Table 5. Percentage of students reporting involvement in assessing work from their classmates Type of student involvement in peer assessment (N= 138) ‘Orally peer to peer’ ‘Orally in groups” ‘Written peer to peer’ ‘Given written comments in groups’ ‘Give a grade to another student’ ‘Giving a grade in groups’

Never (%) 87.6 89.8 92.7 93.8 89.8 95.0

Rarely (%) 4.3 3.6 2.2 3.5 5.8 2.9

Sometimes (%) 7.2 6.5 4.3 1.7 3.6 1.4

Frequently (%) 0.7 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Views of Faculty and Students on Student Involvement Peer Assessment Practices: Qualitative Data Faculty staff and students’ views, in favour and against the involvement of students in collaborative assessment, were sought from qualitative data arising from the two surveys and from the interviews conducted with faculty staff. Due to space constraints, only a brief summary of the findings is presented. In general, faculty staff and students alike were quite favourable to the idea of students being involved in the assessment of their own learning, as demonstrated by 84.2% of faculty staff replying ‘yes’ to that question (Q. A6) and 52.2% of the students ‘strongly agreed’ or ‘agreed’ with the idea (Q. A9). Sample quotations of views in favour of student involvement in the assessment of their learning are presented in Table 6. Although the majority of faculty staff and students were in favour of the idea of students being involved in the assessment of their own learning, it should be noted that a significant minority of faculty (37.8%) and of students (29.6%) gave reasons against the idea (see summary in Table 7). Only 15.8% of faculty staff were of the opinion that they did not believe that students should be involved in the assessment of their own learning (Q. A6) and 9.4% of students ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ with the statement that ‘students should be involved in the assessment of their learning’ (Q. A9). Sample quotations of views against student involvement in the assessment of their learning are presented in Table 7.

DISCUSSION This study focused on how broadly undergraduate students of Hispanic Studies programs are involved in assessing the work of their peers. The findings show that there is very limited involvement of students in assessment that entails collaboration with their peers. The six categories given to the participants (faculty staff and students) on different forms of collaborative assessment go from formative practices - orally or in writing form - to the grading of work which in many cases has a summative function.

98

Rosario Hernández Table 6. Reasons given by faculty staff and students in favour of the involvement of students in the assessment of their learning

Reason

Sample views from faculty

Increases student motivation

“It builds on their motivation and engagement” (S27)

Fosters students’ awareness of their strengths and limitations

“Students become more aware of issues, be they linguistic or structural” (S8)

Contributes to greater student autonomy and responsibility Makes students aware of what is required

Sample views from the students “You are more likely motivated to learn” (C.29) “It could provide more motivation to do well” (F.92) “Students can identify mistakes, rectify them and improve” (C.37) “In correcting and reviewing our work, we have to look more closely to find mistakes, which helps us remember them better” (F.95)

“Students take more responsibility for their learning” (S11) “In order to achieve the independent learning of the student” (S32) “Find this an excellent method of getting students to understand criteria of assessment” (S41)

“It could prove interesting to understand how marks are gained or lost” (C.34)

Table 7. Reasons given by faculty staff and students against the involvement of students in the assessment of their learning Reason

Sample views from faculty

Only faculty are qualified and students don’t have the knowledge

“I believe students are, largely, immature for such assessment” (S1) “Formal assessment is what the lecturer is there to do” (S38)

Peer assessment is biased Produces classroom anxiety

General reluctance

“Not sure how this could work” (S33) “I have mixed feelings” (S21) “Not in third level education” (S36)

Sample views from the students “It is up to the qualified faculty to assess work (D.64) “Students are neither experts in the language nor experts in assessment. They do not have a knowledge of university requirements” (G.133) “Students would be biased towards each others work” (C.31) “If other students are involved, then it can become embarrassing for the student” (C.44)

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

99

For the purpose of the author’s study, results under categories b) and d) (i.e. students working in groups are engaged in assessing the work of their classmates, see p. 6), are the most relevant because of their formative function. However, it may be appropriate to start by implementing categories a) and c) (i.e. when one student is involved in assessing the work of another peer on a one-to-one basis) so as to build trust among students in how to assess the work of another classmate. Great care needs to be taken in the process of involving learners in their own assessment if it is to be successful. The building of trust among students and between the teacher and the learners (Carless, 2009) is essential to create an atmosphere where collaborative assessment can take place. As suggested in the literature (Hernández, 2007b, 2012; Price and O’Donovan, 2006; Sambell, et al., 2006), the involvement of students in the understanding and development of assessment criteria appears to have a very positive effect in helping them to internalise the criteria which is an essential step towards the involvement of students in the process of collaborative assessment. For further details on how to involve students in the development and understanding of assessment criteria see Hernández (2007b; 2012). A further analysis of the six categories listed in Table 4 indicates that although the use of collaborative assessment is limited, faculty staff appear to be using collaborative assessment practices with formative functions ‘sometimes’ and ‘frequently’ in oral (26.8%) or written (12.2%) group activities. This is encouraging as it indicates that faculty staff seem to be aware of the significance of collaborative assessment to support student learning. Data from the students (Table 5) on the other hand, is less conclusive as the involvement of students in collaborative assessment ‘sometimes’ and ‘frequently’ is very low in each of the categories. Although it is encouraging that collaborative assessment appears to be used somewhat in the context of oral activities, the results from this study suggest that there is still a long way to go before collaborative assessment could be a reality in Hispanic Studies. From an analysis of the qualitative data, it appears that the majority of faculty staff and students are in favour of students being involved in the assessment of their own learning. Both groups commented that the participation of students in the assessment process makes students more aware of their strengths and limitations and provides a better understanding of the assessment criteria and the standard required of them. These findings concur with those of Hernández (2007b). As indicated above, another reason given by academics in favour of student involvement in assessment is that it increases motivation for learning, contributing to greater responsibility and autonomy on their part for their learning. This supports similar findings by McDowell and Sambell (1999) who reported that peer assessment gave students more responsibility and autonomy to take control of their learning. Students in the present study, however, did not believe that involvement in their assessment significantly enhanced their responsibility or autonomy. However, they reported that their involvement in the assessment process encouraged them to act on the feedback received. The findings suggest that both academics and students recognise the significant benefits of the involvement of students in the process of assessment. When looking at the views of faculty staff and students against student involvement in collaborative assessment, both groups expressed the opinion that only faculty staff are qualified to assess student learning. In the case of faculty staff, their reluctance to involve students in the assessment process was attributed to a number of factors including a belief that it was not appropriate in third level education to engage students in this practice and were unsure about how it would work, questioning the ability of students to assess their own work.

100

Rosario Hernández

In line with Sambell et al.’s study (2006), it must be acknowledged that students need training and preparation to successfully participate in collaborative assessment. Students require guided activities to support them in the development of peer assessment during the early stages of their university studies. Students were more explicit in expressing their views against student involvement in collaborative assessment; they perceived peer assessment as biased and that assessing each other would be embarrassing and stressful. The reluctance expressed by faculty staff and students to be involved in peer assessment practices may be the result of tradition and beliefs about how assessment should be approached. These views reinforce the idea of a teacher-led approach to assessment and give faculty staff total control of assessment practices with students being mere recipients of assessment practices decided by their teachers. Although these results are not particularly unique to this study, they demonstrate the need to address faculty staff and students’ perceptions about student’s ability to assess their work and to provide the necessary steps to facilitate collaborative assessment. Numerous case studies on collaborative assessment in higher education that support this practice can be found in the literature (see for example an edited collection by O’Neill, Huntley-More and Race, 2007 or McDowell et al., 2005). Two case studies in which collaborative assessment is a driver of student learning are described below. They are from the author’s experience of teaching in higher education.

COLLABORATIVE ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES: CASE STUDIES Case Study 1: Assessment of Group Presentations Done in Groups (Orally) Level 2 students of Spanish (undergraduate students generally take modules at Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3) enrolled in a business language module work in groups to develop a business project. A peer-assessment activity is used earlier in the semester to train students on how to assess oral work presented by the groups working on the project. A set of criteria is agreed upon among the students and the teacher and is used to assess a five-minute oral presentation on one aspect of the group project. There are generally five working groups with four or five students in each group, as the total number of students taking this module ranges between 20 and 25 each year. When all the groups have completed their presentations, which are also video-recorded so that students can obtain a copy of their group presentation, each group is given an opportunity to express their views orally on each of five short presentations delivered. The aim of the exercise is to reflect on how to improve the final presentation of their group at the end of the semester. This activity appears to be a beneficial way of involving students in the assessment of their work in a non-threatening manner. Each group is able to see for themselves the aspects of their presentation that need to be improved (e.g. content, coordination of group work, use of slides, oral skills in Spanish, time management) when they compare their presentation with the presentations given by the other groups. The students perceive this activity positively and they are enthusiastic to provide comments on the presentations. They appear to benefit more from reflecting in groups about their presentation, having seen the presentations of all the groups, than if the teacher tells them the criteria that would be used to assess the presentations of the group projects but are not allowed to apply the criteria on their own work.

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

101

Case Study 2: Assessment of Written Texts Done in Groups (Orally and in Written Form) Undergraduate students of Spanish enrolled in a Level 3 language module complete a written task individually (in Spanish) outside the classroom. Students are requested to submit the stories typed in a Word document format. The teacher removes the names of the students from the texts and gives each story an ID from 1 to 25 (or whatever is the total number of texts submitted). The teacher reads the stories and organises them in six sets - four/five stories in each set - ensuring that in each set there is a mixture of stories whose quality is excellent, good, adequate or poor. Only the teacher knows who the authors of the stories are. Then, the students are involved in a peer-assessment activity in class. The teacher divides students into six groups and the task of each group is to act as the jury of the stories by agreeing on classifying the stories according to their quality by applying the assessment criteria that has been adopted to assess previous tasks. The teacher ensures that the members of the groups are different from those whose stories are distributed so that none of the stories allocated to them belongs to any member of the group. By doing so, not only is anonymity ensured but it also allows students to engage in the assessment process without being embarrassed by confronting them with the assessment of their own story in a public domain. An amount of class time is allocated to reporting orally from each group. One of the students in each group acts as spokesperson on behalf of the group and he/she has to report to the rest of the class the recommendations of the group. Each group also provides a written report on each story commenting on positive features and providing recommendations to the anonymous author on what could be improved. This peer-assessment activity is nonthreatening because the names of the students have been removed from the assignments. Students do not express any fears in providing comments on anonymous assignments (Hernández, 2007c).

CONCLUSION This study has shown that faculty staff and students seem to be in favour of the idea of involving students in the assessment of their learning. However, both groups reported a limited use of practices where students are involved in the assessment of their learning. The perception by both groups that assessment is something that should be controlled by the experts must be challenged, as there is evidence from the literature that students are capable of assessing their own work if they are provided with the right conditions to do so. The historical tradition of assessment for grading and certification seems to be a barrier in moving towards practices of assessment with greater involvement of students in developing skills to assess the value of their work. Those perceptions suggest that faculty staff need to introduce practices involving collaborative assessment that do not necessarily entail grading for summative purposes; only then may students achieve a greater awareness of their ability to assess their own work and to appreciate its value in enhancing their learning. Shifting the beliefs of faculty staff and students about the benefits of collaborative assessment will take time. This shift implies sharing power between faculty staff and students, fostering engagement and working towards students taking responsibility for their

102

Rosario Hernández

own assessment. In addition, preparing students to get involved in the development of assessment criteria, and building student confidence in their ability to assess their work are not easy tasks for faculty staff. Case studies documenting how students can be involved in the process of assessment provide opportunities for faculty staff to familiarise themselves with existing practices in which students are involved in collaborative assessment. Besides, faculty staff that wish to introduce collaborative assessment practices but lack the necessary pedagogical knowledge could participate in workshops that address how to develop collaborative assessment tasks and their implementation. Furthermore, the creation of communities of practice at the departmental/section level would provide the context in which academics could share their practices with each other and encourage others to introduce collaborative assessment practices. Communities of practice have the potential to support faculty staff in the implementation of classroom practices. In addition, communities of practice could provide the context for faculty staff to engage in research activities such as action-based research and/or practitioner enquiry studies that would contribute to institutional change in the areas of pedagogy and in the scholarship of assessment.

REFERENCES Bain, J. (2010). Integrating student voice: Assessment for empowerment. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 4(1), 14-29. Barr, R. B. and Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 13-25. Biggs, J. B. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University. Bloxham, S. and Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide. Berkshire: Open University Press. Boud, D. (2007). Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In: D. Boud and N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the long term (pp.14-25). London: Routledge. Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (2006). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426. Brew, A. (1999). Towards autonomous assessment: Using self- and peer-assessment. In: S. Brown and A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (pp. 159-171). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press. Bryan, C. (2006). Developing group learning through assessment. In: C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (150-157). London: Routledge. Carless, D. (2009). Trust, distrust and their impact on assessment reform. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 79-89. Dochy, F., Segers, M. and Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-349. Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. London: Routledge Falmer.

Supporting Student Learning through Collaborative Assessment Tasks

103

Gibbs, G (1999). Using assessment strategically to change the way students learn. In: S. Brown and A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (pp. 41-53). London: SRHE and Open University Press. Hernández, R. (2007a). The impact of innovative assessment practices on students’ learning. In: S. Frankland (Ed.), Enhancing teaching and learning through assessment: Deriving an appropriate model (pp. 266-278). The Netherlands: Springer. Hernández, R. (2007b). Students' engagement in the development of criteria to assess written tasks. REAP International Online Conference on Assessment Design for Learner Responsibility, May 29-31. Paper available at: http://www.reap.ac.uk/reap/reap07/ Hernández, R. (2007c). Using peer and self-assessment practices to assess written tasks. In: G. O 'Neill, S. Huntley-Moore and P. Race (Eds.), Case studies of good practices in assessment of student learning in higher education (pp. 85-89). Dublin: AISHE. Hernández, R. (2012). Student engagement in learning-oriented assessment: A case study, Global Education Review, 1(2), 76-84. Ioannou, A. and Artino, A. R. (2010). Learn more, stress less: Exploring the benefits of collaborative assessment. College Student Journal, 44(1), pp. 189-199. MacDonald, K. (2011). A reflection on the introduction of a peer and self assessment initiative. Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 6(1), 27-42. Maiden, B. and Perry, B. (2011). Dealing with free-riders in assessed group work: Results from a study at a UK university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(4), 451-464. Marsh, C. J. (2004). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (3rd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer. McDowell, L., Sambell, K., Bazin, V., Penlington, R., Wakelin, D., Wickes, H., and Smailes, J. (2005). Assessment for learning: Current practice exemplars from the centre for excellence in teaching and learning, guides for staff. Newcastle: University of Northumbria at Newcastle. McDowell, L. and Sambell, K. (1999). The experience of innovative assessment: Student perspectives. In: S. Brown and A. Glasner (Eds.), Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches (pp. 71-82). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press. Muldoon, N. and Lee, C. (2007). Formative and summative assessment and the notion of constructive alignment. In: S. Frankland (Ed.), Enhancing teaching and learning through assessment: Deriving an appropriate model (pp. 98-108). The Netherlands: Springer. Nordberg, D. (2008). Group projects: more learning? Less fair? A conundrum in assessing postgraduate business education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 481-492. O’Neill, G., Huntley-Moore, S. and Race, P. (Eds.). (2007). Case studies of good practices in assessment of student learning in higher education. Dublin: AISHE. Orr, S. (2010). Collaborating or fighting for the marks? Students’ experiences of group work assessment in the creative arts. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 301-313. Patton, C. (2012). ‘Some kind of weird, evil experiment’: Student perceptions of peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(6), 719-731.

104

Rosario Hernández

Pettigrew, C., Scholten, I. and Gleeson, E. (2011). Using assessment to promote student capabilities. In: T. Barrett and S. Moore (Eds.), New approaches to problem-based learning: Revitalising your practice in higher education (pp. 171-186). London: Routledge. Price, M. and O’Donovan, M. (2006). Improving performance through enhancing student understanding of criteria and feedback. In: C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 100-109). London: Routledge. Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Sambell, K., McDowell, L. and Sambell, A. (2006). Supporting diverse students: Developing learner autonomy via assessment. In: C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 158-168). London: Routlegde. Savin-Baden, M. (2004). Understanding the impact of assessment on students in problembased learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 41(2), 223-233. Segers, M. and Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value- added of students’ perspectives. Studies in Higher Education, 26 (3), 327-343. Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Moerkerke, G., van Merriënboer, J. G., and Dochy, F. J. R. C. (2001). Peer assessment in problem based learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 153173. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 8

EXAMINING THE ASSESSMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR CULTURAL CONNECTEDNESS FOR STUDENT LEARNING: A SOCIOCULTURAL ANALYSIS Val Klenowski1, Stephen Connolly1 and Robert Funnell2 1

Queensland University of Technology, Australia 2 Griffith University, Australia

ABSTRACT The disparity that exists between the highest and lowest achieverstogether with deficit approaches to teaching, learning and assessmentraise serious equity issues related to fairness, validity, culture and access,which were analysed in a recent Australian Research Council funded project. This chapter explores the potential that exists for teachers to work with Indigenous Teacher Assistants (ITAs) to secure cultural connectedness in teaching, learning and assessment of Indigenous students. The study was a design experiment, which was conducted in seven Catholic and Independent primary schools in northern Queensland and involved semi-structured focus group interviews with Year 4 and 6 Indigenous students, principals, teachers and Indigenous Teacher Assistants. Classroom observations and document analyses were also conducted. This corpus of data was analysed using a sociocultural theoretical lens. The use of a sociocultural analysis helped to identify cultural influences, Indigenous students’ funds of knowledge and values. The information from this analysis was made explicit to teachers to demonstrate how they could enhance theirpedagogic and assessment practices byembracing and extending the cultural spaces for learning and teaching of Indigenous students. The way in which teachers construct their interactions for greater cultural connectedness and enhanced learning would appear to rely on relationship building with Indigenous staff, Indigenous students’ cultural knowledge, and improved understanding of assessment and related equity issues.

Keywords: Fairness, assessment, sociocultural analysis, Indigenous education, inclusive education

106

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

This chapter draws on a mathematics education research project centred on teachers’ assessment and pedagogyin classrooms inclusive ofsome Indigenous Australian(Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) students to explore how such classroom practices could be more culturally responsive. The study aimed to provide greater understanding about how to build more equitable assessment to address the issue of underperforming Indigenous students in regional and remote Australia, and to open up increased opportunities for Indigenous students to achieve success. While seeking to identify assessment practices that are fair and culturally responsive the project sought to understand the necessary pedagogical changes required of teachers. Although the main study included an exploration of the attitudes, beliefs and responses of Indigenous students to assessment in the context of mathematics learning, this chapter focuses on teachers and Indigenous Teacher Assistants (ITA) and their classroom practices. Indigenous Teacher Assistant is used throughout this chapteralthough other terms that are frequently used are Indigenous Education Worker (IEW) and Indigenous Education Aide (IEA). Currently, Indigenous students underachieve in mathematics in schools where the conditions are unsupportive as the mathematics teachers are generally inexperienced (Warren, Baturoand Cooper, 2010) and there are limited family capital and resources in these regions. Such conditions are not evident where above average performance in national standardised tests is achieved. It is our proposition that when teachers are supported to understand the importance of cultural awareness, intercultural relationships, code-switching to access mathematical language and use cultural examples of mathematical concepts, this combination of understanding promotes energy generating factors that contribute to cultural responsive pedagogy for more socially just outcomes. We argue that the potential for more cultural responsive pedagogy and assessment requires productive working relationships with the students first and foremost, and second with the Indigenous community via the ITA.Productive working relationships comprise processes and pedagogic practices that support learning and include content knowledge, knowledge of learners, diagnostic strategies, high expectations, and an ethic of care. The role of the ITA is little understood and requires teachers to rethink their working relationships in classrooms, which forms a tenet of our argument. We begin with contextual backgroundregarding the sub-field of Indigenous Education within the Australian field of education. In particular, we provide the policy context of influential discourses. An overview of the research project and explanation of the methodology of a design experiment follow. In the discussion we unveil taken-for-granted approaches within classroom practices and illustrate how ITAs can help to fulfill an important role as mediators between Indigenous cultures,includingIndigenous students’ funds of knowledge and teachers’ classroom assessment and learning practices.

BACKGROUND This chapter is derived from research conducted at seven schools in regional Queensland, Australia. Our focus is on the relationships within the classrooms that drive everyday practice, and through which a range of responses are developed to the mediating sociological factors present in all classrooms at all times. Factors which became most evidently influential

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

107

in our research were found to emanate from two distinct cultures positioned within the subfield of Indigenous Education within the Australian field of education; one, the socially positioned culture of Australian schools, and two, the cultural position of Indigenous students attending the schools involved in the study. Sadly the old cliché a clash of cultures is an apt description of the situation encountered. Despite government rhetoric and the best intentions of some (though not all) school staffto engage Indigenous students in the standardised, Westernised and White (Hickling-Hudson, 2005; Moreton-Robinson, 1999) form of education prescribed by government curriculums, many of the Indigenous students in our study were unable to assimilate successfully with school culture, or succeed in terms of “legitimate” (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1990, p. 162) educational attainment. We found that the majority of Indigenous students in the classrooms we observed were not provided with the sociocultural tools or ways of participationto fully engage with and comprehend the intentions of the teachers and school staff, not necessarily in terms of grasping the nature of prescribed educational content, but more in terms of not being able to access the privileged language, which refers to the legitimate and recognised discourses of the school culture. For some of these students English is a second (or third, or fourth) language and so some difficulties with translation were experienced, but the greater barrier to understanding was the culturally situated structure of classroom discourses and the mismatch of meanings and understandings generated by culturally specific language and terminologies. In this sense, the problem of a breakdown in classroom interaction resides in understanding, both what teachers understand to be effective practices of communication and the actual understanding or reading of those practices by Indigenous students. This disconnection of dialogue exposes the inconsistency between sociocultural positioning of teachers and students in classroom settings and emphasises the often incompatible nature of interaction processes initiated by teachers. Following is a description of the discourses and structures that constitute the school culture and the teachers’ habitus (Bourdieu, 2007) in the present study. The schools involved in this research contribute to the various discourses that structure theory, policy, and practice of Indigenous education in Australia. By this we mean the various approaches, methods, regulations, and conceptualisations of teaching Indigenous students in Australian schools. Following Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples in 2008, all Australian governments “adopted a new approach and committed to six ambitious, long term, Closing the Gap targets which aim to bridge the divide between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in life expectancy, educational achievement and employment opportunities” (DEEWR, 2008, p. iii). Of the six targets the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) has key responsibility for the following: 1. to ensure all Indigenous four year olds in remote communities have access to early childhood education within five years; 2. to halve the gap in reading, writing and numeracy achievements for Indigenous children within a decade; 3. to halve the gap for Indigenous students in year 12 attainment or equivalent attainment rates by 2020; and 4. to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade. (DEEWR, 2012)

108

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

DEEWR’s commitment to these responsibilities has been documented in several Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) publications (DEEWR, 2009, 2011a) and several evaluative reports have been generated from Australian Government Indigenous Education programs (Australian Government, 2008, 2011; DEEWR, 2008, 2010, 2011b). Thus, the field of Australian Indigenous education is largely developed from, and regulated by, Government RAP initiatives and reporting instruments. This approach to policy instigation and management is homologous with the Australian Government’s development of nationalisedstandardised education and assessment which has seen the development of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), the My School website and the Australian Curriculum. A particular student interaction, teaching and learning context exists for teachers and staff at the seven schools included within this study; these schools are entrenched in the DEEWR Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) and at the same time accountable for the prescriptive participation requirements of NAPLAN and the introduction of the Australian Curriculum. These government initiatives are supported by funding, however budget allocations are constrained and regulated by accountability and reporting. Apple (2005) discusses the exponential expansion of commodifying logics in relation to worldwide trends in education and uses the term audit culture to describe a global phenomenon of the “odd combination of marketization on the one hand and centralization of control on the other” (p. 382). He maintains that the prominent discourses and basic assumptions that generate and foster neoliberal, neoconservative, and new managerial forms have profoundly influenced not only institutions but even our better judgement. This form of audit culture has been fostered by successive Australian Governments (Liberal Party 1996 – 2007; Australian Labor Party 2007 – present) which have prioritisedstandards and school/staff evaluation as a means of measuring school performance and regulating funding (Connell, 2009). In the pursuit of raising achievement levels to compete in international scaling reports, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), Government policies have focused on standardised education and assessment as the catalyst for improved student outcomes in schools (Rawolle and Lingard, 2008; Reid, 2011). Achieving these increases has become a prescriptive and systematised policy directive in schools, shaping discourses in classrooms, teaching and learning practices, and school leadership structures and responsibilities (Ball, Hoskins, Maguire, and Braun, 2011). Bartlett, Knight and Lingard(1992) described reforms in education as subsumed within a “national metapolicy of corporate federalism which is an amalgam of beliefs or discourses including neocorporatism, economic rationalism, corporate managerialism and human capital” (p. 19). As Connell (2009) points out, the various state produced professional standards documents are laden with the language of “corporate managerialism; ‘challenges’, ‘goals’, ‘stakeholders’, ‘partnerships’, ‘strategies’, ‘commitment’, ‘capacity’, ‘achievable’, ‘effective’, ‘flexible’, and ‘opportunities’” (pp. 219-220). This structuring of the Australian field of education is constituted according to the logical principles(Bourdieu, 1977,1990, 1998; Bourdieu and Passeron, 1990) of evaluation and accountability, which have mediated classroom relationships. All Australian states and territories have recently become concerned with teacher accountability (Connell, 2009). Teacher and school accountability often causes teachers and school-administrators concern due to institutional dispositions towards evaluation. Teachers often feel uneasy about ambiguity in prescriptive practice demands and uncertainty of future

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

109

demands in government prioritisededucational initiatives (Conley and Glasman, 2008). School administrators may experience pressure concerning the multiple and often conflicting priorities and demands of their work and can bestressed by perceived workloads and deadlines (Pounder and Merrill, 2001). Nevertheless, Australian governments see the implementation of professional evaluation as a means of both justifying budget allocation and ensuring student performance in league tables and national performance in PISA. These are the contextual issues of the currentstudy. Teachers and students were engaging in discourses underpinned by Australian government education reforms and couched in the euphemistic language of equal opportunity and management through accountability and evaluation. We found teachers were struggling in classroom situations to make sense of the DEEWR’s teaching approaches prescribed by Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) initiatives in light of their perceived responsibilities towards an audit culture which is permeating schools across Australia. Classroom contexts are conflictedby educational systems whichboth group students in a one-size-fits-all approach to assessment and outcomes, and also only recognise and reward individual performances in terms of awarding legitimate cultural capital. DEEWR advocates close relationships and understanding of student needs in RAP documents yet many teachers have not received adequate training to effectively make these connections with Indigenous students. Moreover, this study found that Western-White values were most often the cultural aesthetic of school work and school discourses produced in classroom sites. Western-White cultural capital regulates the exchange rates within the schools and Indigenous habitus is misrecognised. The identification of a view of Indigeneity couched in euphemistic discourses of remedial approaches to language assimilation, and indeed cultural assimilation, mediated school culture and classroom discourses. Teachers with good intentions may strive to include students in the cultural literacy and culturally specific funds of knowledge of the classroom, but have not had the professional training, nor the cultural experience to provide for effective or proficient inclusion processes within the classroom. There are degrees of proficiency and experience but on the whole teachers’ classroom practices are mediated by an audit culture, are largely driven by dispositions external to classroom settings, and consequently are falling short of full empathetic recognition, acceptance and inclusion of students from non-dominant cultural backgrounds in the classroom.

OVERVIEW This project was an Industry Linkage program funded by the Australian Research Council, conducted in seven Catholic and Independent primary schools in northern Queensland with industry partners: Catholic Education and the Association of Independent Schools, Queensland.The research problem related to the patterns of under-achievement by Indigenous students as reflected in national benchmark databases such as National Assessment Program Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) and international testing programs like the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). A trend of underperformance in terms of equity has continued over the past six years as is evident from the comparative analyses of PISA results, first administered in 2000, in 2003, in 2006 and again in 2009.

110

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

We explored the teaching conditions andorganisation of assessment in the sevenschools where the performance of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students varied and fluctuated. The perspectives of senior staff, ITAs, and teachers who were teaching at least some Indigenous students were analysed. The number of Indigenous students in relation to the rest of the school’s student population in theseresearch schools varied from 5%, 6%, 7% (in two schools),13%, 21% to 100%. In the latter school, 92% of these Indigenous students had Languages Other Than English (inclusive of a mix of first, second and possibly third languages). A sociocultural conceptual framework was adopted to explain why and how variations in achievement might occurand this perspective helped to focus the study on factors such as the students’ language and their sociocultural and socioeconomic circumstances. From a sociocultural perspective, learning is viewed as occurring as part of our everyday experience as we participate in the world. This theory of learning does not view a separation between contexts where learning occurs and contexts for everyday life, rather these are seen as different opportunities for learning (Murphy, Hall, McCormick and Drury, 2008). It is important to move away from the notion that the individual is the determinant of learning and begin to focus onthe activities that they engage in and the actions that they undertake using the resources and tools available.As Murphy and colleagues (2008, p. 7) stress when they cite McDermott (1996) “… we can only learn what is around to learn.”From this sociocultural view of learning the students’ sense of belonging in a classroom of learners is important and raises the issue of access not only to learning experiences but also to assessment tasks designed to develop the Indigenous students’ understanding byincreasing their participation.

METHODOLOGY The project was a design experiment (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003) about fairness in educational assessment. This research design has been used extensively by educators in medium-scale curriculum innovation in United States schools (Cobb, Confrey, diSessa, Lehrer, andSchauble, 2003) and was developed at Vanderbilt, Washington and University of California, Berkeley. It combines a rigorous approach to data collected on the effects of an intervention from programme development through action research. The intervention in this study was a professional development programme of pedagogical and assessment change that was reviewed and revised in light of new empirical evidence of the intended and unintended effects. This section reflects on how the intervention was framed and the discussion provides an analysis of emergent themes with a particular focus on cultural connectedness, theoretically informed by the sociocultural perspective adopted. In this study, a sociocultural framing to the design experiment resulted in a more qualitative case study approach. This design experiment was predominantly qualitative drawing on a number of data sources. These included: 1) detailed analyses of NAPLAN data of the Year 4 and 6 Indigenous students’ responses (completed when they were in Year 3 and 5 of the previous year) from the seven focus schools; 2) an analysis of socio-cultural factors which might influence their scores (such as cultural specificity of how the item or question was framed, the linguistic codes and conventions of the test, cultural-specificity of content knowledge,

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

111

possible misinterpretation of questions); 3) interview data about the relations between each school and the Indigenous students and families; 4) interview data of the cultural and pedagogic understandings that ITAs bring into classrooms; and, 5) interview data of the attitudes and dispositions of Year 4 and 6 teachers and senior staff to Indigenous students and their learning. Severaliterativecycles of design and development to classroom intervention were involved in this design experiment (Brown, 1992; Kelly, 2003). Three schools and eight teachers were involved in the first phase. There were two teachers from two schools (a Year 4 and Year 6 teacher from each, one of the latter has a Year 6/7 class) and four from the third school (two Year 4 and two Year 6 teachers). The teachers were in schools where the Indigenous student population varied from 5%, 7% to 21%. In total the number of Indigenous students was 22 (14 Year 4 students and 8 Year 6 students).During this phase the professional learning program was developed and refined to consider how assessment could be made fairer for the Indigenous students. The second phase involved the extension of the professional learning programme to four other schools with Indigenous student populations ranging from 6%, 7%, 13% to 100% and a further eight teachers. In this second phase there was a move away from the didactic, ‘telling’ approach which characterised the first phase to an approach which involved working more closely with teachers and ITAs in their classrooms. Each school principal and the Year 4 and 6 teachers involved in the project received the detailed summaries of each Indigenous student’s responses to the NAPLAN tests taken the year before they entered Year 4 or Year 6. Each question was analysed so that teachers could check each student’s answers to the different mathematical strands. The descriptive analysis of each answer aimed to support a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying concept and to suggest the next steps to be taken to support the student’s development in the identified mathematical conception or misconception. Semi-structured focus group interviews were carried out with the Year 4 and 6 Indigenous students. Interviews were conducted with principals and with Indigenous staff (e.g. ITAs, community liaison staff, education workers) to gain a broad view of cultural influences and values that affect the dispositions of Indigenous students’ learning, particularly in relation to mathematics. The background information from these interviews has been analysed further to augment data from the individual NAPLAN test results. As would be expected, Indigenous and non-Indigenous students scored across a continuum of band levels. Further data analyses and reconsideration of interview data resulted in the shift of focus to culture-responsive assessment and pedagogy.Given that an aim of the project was to understand factors and school conditions that affect teachers’ assessment and pedagogic capacity and to scaffold and extend Indigenous students’ mathematical understandings, the discussion section of this chapter centers on analyses of the interview data which highlight the value and potential for cultural connectedness. Data from each school was collated and combined to identify beliefs, attitudes and practices. All interviews were transcribed andanalysed according to the factors that impact on teachers’ assessment and pedagogic capacity and understandings of fair assessment practice. This initial analysis and categorisationwas further analysed using the software program Leximancer to identify dominant words, phrases and themes. These emergent themes were again compared and critically analysed for validity purposes. From a sociocultural frame it is acknowledged that a multiplicity of factors influence views including historical, social and cultural assumptions that underpin responses.The data analysis on which this chapter is based

112

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

revealed a continuum of practice froma prevalence of deficit discourse, low expectations for Indigenous success and limited understanding of cultural responsiveness in pedagogy or assessment to increased cultural awareness and substantive attempts to engage with ITAs to embrace cultural spaces.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION It became evident from the data analyses that although teachers want the best for their students, they continue to use teaching and assessment strategies that do not recognise the cultural variations of their Indigenous students and do not appear aware of how these differences mediate the Indigenous students’ learning and assessment outcomes.The majority of teachers (14 or 87.5%) interviewed indicated that they felt Indigenous students should be treated and taught in the same way as everyone else. For example, teachers often stated we teach Indigenous students “thesame way we do everybody else.”These conditions for socialisation operated in parallel with Indigenous identity formation. At all levels it was said that we “keep things the same (for them) as for the others… the same tests, the same method of teaching”. Another typical comment from one of the teachers interviewed was: They [Indigenous students] are included in everything … there are kids who struggle a lot more … So the focus is to promote learning for all regardless of their cultural background.

Similar to other studies (Warren et al.,2010; Cooper, Baturoand Warren, 2005) also found that the majority of teachers had very little professional development or teacher preparation in relation to Indigenous cultural awareness. To illustrate, when asked if there was any support or professional development this teacher responded: Yes, I think so, a few years ago. I can’t remember what …

Another common Non-Indigenous teacher’s response: I haven’t had a great deal of experience [with Indigenous students]. They’re very quiet. They don’t tend to ask questions so you have to be asking them more…

It was also apparent that ITAs had received limited training in how to assist teachers in supporting Indigenous students’ education. Both Non-Indigenous and Indigenous staff expressed a keen interest in gaining further understanding.

Deficit Discourse Internationally, an important understanding of cultural difference has occurred in that there has been a shift from a deficit view of the learner to a more considered view of how the school or the system can take responsibility for the development of culturally responsive models and quality teaching programmes that incorporate formative assessment (Ainscow, 2010; Comber andKamler, 2004; Bishop, O’Sullivan, and Berryman, 2010; Mahuika,

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

113

Berryman and Bishop, 2011). Too often teachers or principals will indicate that very little can be done to improve the achievement of Indigenous students with explanations for low achievement directed at the student, the student’s home circumstances or outside of school experiences. For example in our study one principal had this to say: He’s the boy who turned up with a stab wound. The little brother, I expelled, came to school with major ear infections, … mum was sending him to school. Wasn’t even taking him to the doctor. She couldn’t care less... She was caught up in all these relationships and she was thinking about herself, you know the kids had no food …

Teachers too were expressing deficit views as evident here: Looking at the ones I have at the moment, they’re all from either a broken home or, one in particular is with, what they call, a nanny. So she’s the mother’s aunty. So there’s not a traditional family setting and the parents that I have met, I’m not sure what their approach to academics is … school’s somewhere where you just go for the day and I think that can affect your approach to our academic... If it’s just somewhere you are for the day your level of skills, the effort that you put in isn’t necessarily a valuable thing.

The teachers’ comments time and again were indicative of their habitus inculcated with the rhetoric of standardisation and a school audit culture. This contextual field of the teachers was seen as mediating classroom discourses and dispositions, which tended to result in misrecognition of the student habitus. As expressed by Mahuika, Berryman and Bishop, (2011, p.189) in relation to the teachers of their review “… teachers pathologisedMãori students’ lived experiences by explaining their lack of educational achievement in deficit terms as something within the child or the child’s home” with the consequence of “the creation of negative and problematic relationships between teachers and Mãori students; lowered teacher expectations of Mãori students’ abilities; and a loss of an appreciation of how powerful agentic teachers can be in bringing about change in learning outcomes for students previously denied access to the benefits that education has to offer.” These authors emphasise how teachers who adopt this view tend to blame someone or something beyond their influence and in so doing suggest that they are unable to take responsibility for the outcomes of these influences. As apparent from our analysis some teachers and principals saw the Indigenous students’ home circumstances or the Indigenous students’ parents as the cause for the students’ lack of achievement at school. Such talk of outcomes, comparative achievement and expectations also reflects the discourse of an audit culture. Evidence of lower expectations for Indigenous students was an issue raised by ITAs, for example: When the new principal came I had a talk with him and our Indigenous students are under the Learning Support banner. He did have a speech to us, … the aides and the support staff, and said we don’t have high expectations for our Learning Support studentsWe don’t have high expectations. They just need to know how to function in society, but they don’t need to write a great essay. I thought mm, okay. So I was ready to get up and leave then and I thought, no, if I leave who is going to fight for them. So that’s why I stayed and slowly but surely I think things have improved, slowly, but they are not to where they were.

114

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

Schools and teachers need to develop their capacity to identify “deficit views of difference” (Ainscow, 2009, p.6) which position students as ”lacking in something” (p.6) These assumptions that relate to notions of deficit regarding difference are challenged from a sociocultural perspective of learning and assessment that gives greater respect to the valuing of difference. A diagnostic and holistic view of the student’s background, culture, language and demeanour, is seen as more beneficial for the teacher to gain a better understanding from their use of formative assessment to identify the student’s learning needs. Assessment and pedagogy that is responsive to cultural variations and that helps to build supportive relationships between teachers and their students acknowledges that culture is central to learning. Indigenous students who are supported to draw on their ‘funds of knowledge’ (Moll, 1992, p. 21) or what they know, or their ways of sense making from their culture, gain in terms of classroom learning. Teaching and assessment that is culture responsive and allows for different ways of knowing facilitates increased agency for Indigenous students. Culture inclusive assessment does not attempt to favour different cultural groups, rather it is recognised that cultural differences can impact on performance, such as on standardised tests. The way in which teachers construct their interactions for greater cultural connectedness and enhanced learning relies on relationship building with Indigenous staff, with Indigenous students’ cultural knowledge and improved understanding of assessment and related equity issues. How greater cultural connectedness could be achieved emerged from critical analyses of the interview data of the ITAs.

Relationship Building Non-Indigenous teacher aides indicated that Indigenous students were not being properly socialized into the expectations of school life and for them the problem was “not really [Indigenous students’] ability to be able to do the work: it's more the behaviour side of it; the conforming to a structured system”. From this perception, Indigenous culture is least likely to be a background for student identity formation when non-conformity foregrounds assessment of their worth. Alternatively, where a teacher sees Indigenous children as shy and “slow to join in”, an ITA sees the problem as a collective issue rather than an individual one, in that “it’s peer pressure” at the centre of students “not being game to have a go”. From this ITA’s perspective, “The peers are the main risk, more than any other.” The Indigenous child faces a balancing act to do well and keep face at the same time: “If you get it wrong then you get teased and stuff like that”. The ITAs are well positioned to pass on to the teachers with whom they work understandings of Indigenous students’ attitudes and responses in particular situations. However, fulfilling this essentially cultural function is only one part of an equation, the other is the knowledge they derive about teaching Indigenous students from their daily observations of classroom interactions. These two dimensions of ITA’s work are now represented and discussed. Wedraw on the interviews with two ITAs who work with Prep to Year 7 classes in a school of around 350 students. Kathryn, of Aboriginal descent, works with Indigenous and non-Indigenous students in 15 classrooms. Sonia, from the Torres Strait Islands, advises and teaches about Torres Strait Island culture and dance to both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. Their names have been changed for ethical reasons. Both women indicated: “Yes, this is a good school, we’re well looked after”. As mothers, both women made comparisons

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

115

with the education of their own children, and what they considered to be cultural misunderstandings in the teaching of this school. Each ITA enjoyed the contact with students, staff and parents and the chance to “think I’ve melted that barrier a little bit”. Contradictions in the ITAs’ roles were identified, however. Their comments could be seen as criticisms if taken out of context, but they are in fact barriers that the ITAs would like to surmount in an environment characterized as supportive of Indigenous education and dedicated to education for all. The three key themes central to relationship building and cultural connectedness relate to: code switching, cultural understanding and mathematics, and furthering relations between Indigenous workers and teachers. To illustrate one ITA explained in relation to code switching: …our Indigenous boys, they can talk fine in the classroom but when it comes to writing it’s in Pidgin English.

This excerpt illustrates a general misunderstanding of variations between school/teacher language and the problems of switching codes for Indigenous students to accommodate set classroom tasks. Differences in Indigenous students’ language, and the language used in classrooms,was an important consideration for the ITAs as illustrated: Sonia: I think language is one of the cultural barriers for them. I speak the Torres Strait Creole the majority of the time at home with my kids and so they’re based around that 100 per cent. When they’re in the community or when they come to school they need to code switch and speak English … sometimes when they deliver their answer in English it doesn’t come out right but the teacher doesn’t understand. Kathryn: … when it comes to writing it’s in Pidgin English. It’s the way we understand it. The teachers, they come to us and say he’s got problems, he can’t write a sentence right. Hey, let’s think about the non-Indigenous students, some of them can’t write a sentence properly. … It needs to be accepted on both sides. You’ve got to understand how they talk at home. You can’t stop that language from being spoken at home.

The benefits, opportunities and importance of working with an ITA, an Indigenous teacher or community member cannot be underestimated. The two ITAs not only brought fresh insights and challenged the deficit discourses evident in the school, but they also provided opportunities for teachers to ‘see differently’ and for teachers to challenge their own assumptions. It is in this way ITAs can perform an important role to help remove barriers and to support opportunities for improved relationships. For the students to have ITAs who demonstrate such understanding to allow them to switch codes “just to give the kids a lift” is another important opportunity for Indigenous students to feel as though they belong. The importance of cultural understanding in the teaching of mathematics is made explicit by the following ITAs: No, they don’t like it [mathematics], they struggle. Most of them tell me that ‘I’m not good at maths’. I think it’s all off the board and onto a piece of paper, more than hands on. Some of the teachers think the kids are going to play with the blocks but we want to teach them, show them that there’s an easier way to understand hundreds, tens and ones. Our kids are more hands on.

116

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell Maths is a big up hurdle for a lot of Torres Strait kids. The new way of doing simple addition is just so confusing … I see a lot of our teachers have a teachers’ book that they carry in front of them when they do maths. They refer back to that book the whole time. I find the children understand it but they have a mental block... I have to ask, ‘Oh, can you go back, I lost you there. Can we?’ … And they always go back which is good. Then I know where I am. A Torres Strait Islander teacher was saying how maths differs here… to the remote where they are up in the Torres Strait. For example, if you are to ask a child a question like how long does it take from Townsville to Cairns, he’ll tell you in kilometres or in hours. Whereas if you’re asking a child in the Torres Strait, how long does it take from Thursday Island to Badu Island he’ll tell you how many petrol drums you need. Rather than the distance in kilometres and hours - that is totally different.

These examples obviously provide insights into differences in the logics underlying estimation and calculation between Torres Strait and European cultures. But in effect, they are more likely to raise awareness than inform day-to-day teaching. The fact that ITAs watch and learn as they work with students means they can integrate their knowledge with that of a teacher. This can be seen in the case of an ITA who “looks after Grades 3 and 4 kids who are struggling with either writing or reading or with the sums they are doing”. Her views are insightful. The concepts are beyond them, but with others it’s simple… there is a range – some kids … are fairly advanced to the others who are struggling. I think it’s sometimes reading is the hardest things to do in maths and ... I simplify it by reading it to them again and ... it’s like having to sit and do it with them – they stop if you walk away. There are a couple of kids, even after you do it two or three times, they still stop, because they’re not understanding the real concept, the fundamental concept ... but others who grasp it they just keep going. They just go, ‘I’m alright Miss; you can go’.

In many ways the discourse adopted by this ITA(i.e. the tracing to concepts, linking reading with the teaching of mathematics) are not significantly different from that of a trained teacher assessing her practices. This being the case, questions need to beposed about extending the roles of ITAs beyond that of cultural advisor to being partners in teaching and learning. The action of extending the roles of ITAs is fundamental to the establishment of powerful relations in the classroom such that they are truly two-way. The non-Indigenous teacher and the ITA need to work together to build important learning relationships for the Indigenous students in their classrooms so that these students who are often in the minority truly feel as though they belong. The irony in this study was that teachers and ITAs seemed to talk past each other. Teachers reported that they heavily relied on the ITAs for cultural matters such as reading body language, information about home life family and siblings. ITAs thought teachers left them alone to prepare resources and work with difficult children but did not ask their advice about problems in learning. In general, ITAs were not confident in approaching the teachers as equals. A consideration ofthepossibilities for extending ITAs’ relations with teachers as co-partners in furthering Indigenous learning is evident from the suggestions made by two ITAs, Kathryn

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

117

and Sonia. Both women expressed some frustration about their relations with teachers as copartners in furthering Indigenous learning. Kathryn: We get new teachers in every year so we have to guide them and say this child here needs extra help; we know the children and who needs help and who doesn’t need help. Sometime the teachers aren’t aware. They think that children have a problem because they don’t know the work but teachers don’t look at the background and what’s happening at home. I think that we might not have that piece of paper that teachers have but we can educate the teachers how to teach our children. That’s where we can come in. Interviewer: You would like to be working together on how to teach kids? Sonia: Yes, rather than you’re a teacher and I’m a teacher aide full stop. ‘I’ve got the certificate and the number there on that certificate to say that I’m a qualified teacher. I’ve been teaching for so many years’ sort of thing; and ‘you do what I say’.We need to talk, have that conversation between one another. We talk about children but not how to teach the children. Yes, you talk about children that didn’t cope with it, they couldn’t do this, or what has so and so done – ‘but what about how we’re going to teach them?’

CONCLUSION As ITAs work with teachers they can model ways for them to embrace cultural spaces of which they are not aware and thus enlarge their repertoire of strategies for assessment and intervention. Working together affords an opportunity to enact cultural connectedness and open up curriculum spaces and to examine taken-for-granted approaches within classroom practices. Herein lies a number of unexamined assessment opportunities within existing practices which returns us to questions of why ITAs are seldom called on to act as mediators between cultural and pedagogical spaces. The views of ITAs were valued for their fresh insights into practice and understanding of teaching and learning mathematics. The ITAs in this study have a particular focus on cultureresponsive pedagogy and assessment, and possess knowledge teachers can learn from to understand how Indigenous students’ funds of knowledge can be drawn upon in activities that involve, for example, measurement and code switching. Germane strategies such as problem solving, routine thinking and the impact of language acquisition on students’ competencies to decode written assessment tasks provide rich territory for further research and where the role of the ITA becomes significant to realise the potential for relationship building.

REFERENCES Ainscow, M. (2010). Achieving excellence and equity: Reflections on the development of practices in one local district over 10 years. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21 (1), 75-91. Apple, M. W. (2005). Audit cultures, commodification, and class and race strategies in education. Policy Futures in Education, 3(4).

118

Val Klenowski, Stephen Connolly and Robert Funnell

Australian Government. (2008). National Report to Parliament on Indigenous Education and Training, 2008. Canberra: Author. Australian Government. (2011). Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Act Annual Report 2009. Canberra: Author. Ball, S., Hoskins, K., Maguire, M., and Braun, A. (2011). Disciplinary texts: A policy analysis of national and local behaviour policies. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 114. Bartlett, L., Knight, J., and Lingard, B. (1992). Restructuring teacher education in Australia. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 13(1), 19-36. Bishop, R., O’Sullivan, D., and Berryman, M. (2010). Scaling up education reform: Addressing the politics of disparity. Wellington: NZCER Press. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (2007). Sketch for a self-analysis. Cambridge: Polity. Bourdieu, P., and Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (R. Nice, Trans. 2nd ed.). London: Sage. Brown, A. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., andSchauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. Comber, B., andKamler, B. (2004). Getting out of deficit: Pedagogies of reconnection. Teaching Education, 15(3), 293-310. Conley, S., and Glasman, N. S. (2008). Fear, the school organization, and teacher evaluation. Educational Policy, 22(1), 63-85. Connell, R. (2009). Good teachers on dangerous ground: Towards a new view of teacher quality and professionalism. Critical Studies in Education, 50(3), 213-229. Cooper, T., Baturo, A. and Warren, E. (2005). Indigenous and non-Indigenous teaching relationships in three mathematics classrooms in remote Queensland. In H. Chick and J. Vincent (Eds) Proceedings of the 29thconference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, 4 (pp. 305 -312). Melbourne: University of Melbourne. DEEWR. (2008). National report to parliament on Indigenous education and training, 2006. Canberra: Australian Government. DEEWR. (2009). Statement of Commitment. Canberra: Australian Government. DEEWR. (2010). 2009-2010 Annual report on the 2009-2011 DEEWR Reconciliation Action Plan. Canberra: Australian Government. DEEWR. (2011a). Reconciliation Action Plan 2011–2014. Canberra: Australian Government. DEEWR. (2011b). 2010-2011 Annual report on the 2009-2011 DEEWR Reconciliation Action Plan. Canberra: Australian Government. DEEWR. (2012). Indigenous overview. Retrieved 23 April 2012, from http:// www.deewr.gov.au/ indigenous/Pages/Overview.aspx. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher 32(1), 5-8.

Examining the Assessment Opportunities for Cultural Connectedness …

119

Hickling-Hudson, A. (2005). ‘White’, ‘Ethnic’ and ‘Indigenous’: Pre-service teachers reflect on discourses of ethnicity in Australian culture. Policy Futures in Education, 3(4), 340358. Kelly, A. (2003). Research as design.Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3-4. Mahuika, R., Berryman, M. and Bishop, R. (2011) Issues of culture and assessment in New Zealand education pertaining to Mãori Students, Assessment Matters, 3, pp. 183-198. Moll, L.C. (1992) Bilingual classroom studies and community analysis.Educational Researcher 21 (2). 20-24. Moreton-Robinson, A. (1999). Unmasking Whiteness: A Goori Jondal’s look at some duggai business. In B. McKay (Ed.), Unmasking Whiteness: Race relations and reconciliation (pp. 28-36). Brisbane, QLD: Griffith University. Murphy, P., Hall, K., McCormick, R. and Drury, R. (2008) Curriculum, learning and society: Investigating practice. Study guide, Masters in Education. Maidenhall, UK: Open University. Pounder, D. G., and Merrill, R. J. (2001). Job desirability of the high school principalship: A job choice theory perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 27-57. Rawolle, S., and Lingard, B. (2008). The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu and researching education policy. Journal of Education Policy, 23(6), 729-741. Reid, A. (2011). What sort of equity? Professional Educator, 10(4), 3-4. Warren, E., Baturo, A. R., and Cooper, T. J. (2010) Power and authority in school and community: Interactions between non-Indigenous teachers and Indigenous teacher assistants in remote Australian schools. In J. Zajda, and M. A. Geo-JaJa (eds) The politics of education reforms: Globalisation, comparative education and policy research, 9,(pp. 193-207). Dordrecht: Springer.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 9

STUDENT PATHWAYS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller Texas A&M University-Commerce, TX, US Transylvania University, Lexington, KY, US

ABSTRACT In the present chapter we review research examining global citizenship in educational environments. As the world has become increasingly interconnected, educators are tasked with revising their teaching approach and pedagogy to prepare students for a vastly different world after school. Global citizenship education serves to engender prosocial values (e.g., intergroup empathy and helping) and openness to new experiences that equip students to engage with a globalized world. We define global citizenship as global awareness, caring, embracing cultural diversity, promoting social justice and sustainability, and a sense of responsibility to act. Past research (Reysen and Katzarska-Miller, 2012) has shown that a greater perception that others have in one’s normative environment (e.g., friends, family) prescribe being a global citizen and global awareness (i.e., knowledge of the world and connection with others) predict greater identification with global citizens (i.e., felt psychological connection with the category global citizen). Global citizenship identification subsequently predicts greater endorsement of prosocial values (i.e., intergroup empathy, valuing diversity, social justice, environmental sustainability, intergroup helping, and a felt responsibility to act for the betterment of the world). In the present chapter we (1) review past theory regarding global citizenship antecedents (normative environment, global awareness) and outcomes (prosocial values), (2) review research showing the influence of students’ normative environment and global awareness on global citizenship identification and related prosocial values, and (3) propose practical interventions that educators can take to enhance student learning based on the current research.

Keywords: Global citizenship, normative environment, global awareness, education, social justice

122

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

STUDENT PATHWAYS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP As the world has become increasingly interconnected, institutions of higher education have begun to revise university goals to focus on internationalizing education (Maringe, 2010). An often-cited motivation by university administration to internationalize the university is the promotion of values characterizing global citizens (Fielden, 2006). The push for world, or global citizenship education (educating with a global perspective) began in the UK in the 1920s, gained momentum in the 1970s and 1980s, and eventually spread to the US in the 1990s (Heater, 2000; Hicks, 2003). However, global citizenship education is still in its infancy (Lewin, 2009) as universities struggle to define, conceptualize, and construct programs with measurable outcomes or academic standards (Andrzejewski and Alessio, 1999; Pike, 2000; Sperandio, Grudzinski-Hall, and Stewart-Gambino, 2010). In the present chapter we review past conceptions of global citizenship values and antecedents to viewing the self as a global citizen, describe recent empirical research showing the antecedents and outcomes of viewing the self as a global citizen, and provide suggestions for educators who wish to engender global citizenship in students.

CONCEPTIONS OF GLOBAL CITIZEN VALUES Global citizenship is theorized to relate to a variety of prosocial values. Although some theorists highlight certain values and behaviors over others (e.g., Appiah (2006) highlights morality and ethics while Tarrant (2010) emphasizes environmental sustainability), a review of global citizenship literature shows consistent themes. The result of a thematic review of prior theorizing indicates that identifying oneself as a global citizen is related to intergroup empathy, valuing diversity, social justice, environmental sustainability, intergroup helping, and a felt responsibility to act (Reysen, Pierce, Spencer, and Katzarska-Miller, 2010). Below we review prior conceptualizations of each prosocial value that are found in discussions regarding global citizenship. Intergroup empathy is a felt connection and concern for people outside one’s ingroup (Reysen and Katzarska-Miller, 2012). Stokes (2008) posits that global citizens are actively concerned about global issues and their impact on others. Schattle (2008) notes that awareness of interconnectedness with others, regardless of subgroup memberships, leads to greater empathetic concern. Golmohamad (2008) suggests that empathy results from identifying as a global citizen, and further proposes that empathy will lead to altruistic acts to help others. Empathetic concern for others is also related to valuing others regardless of their geographical, cultural, ethnic, or religious backgrounds. Together, theorists have suggested that global citizens experience empathetic concern for others inside and outside one’s ingroup. Valuing diversity represents an interest and appreciation for the diverse cultures of the world. While most educational programs endorse tolerance for diversity, global citizens embrace diversity by actively seeking to learn and value other perspectives. Theorists suggest that global citizens respect diverse perspectives (Morais and Ogden, 2011) and beliefs and practices of others (Dower, 2002a, 2002b; O’Byrne, 2003), value (Walkington, 1999), and understand and appreciate diversity (Basirico and Bolin, 2009; Golmohamad, 2008). Baogang

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

123

He (2005) proposes that the basic premise of global citizenship is that all people (ingroup and outgroup) are equal, and global citizens are primarily concerned with cultural equality. Global citizens’ proposed focus on embracing cultural diversity is also related to the suggestion that global citizens endorse social justice. Social justice includes attitudes concerning human rights and equitable treatment of all humans. Theorists often link global citizenship with the notion of respecting and protecting human rights (Dower, 2002a, 2002b; Heater, 2000; O’Byrne, 2003; Pitty, Stokes, and Smith, 2008). Heron (2011) describes global citizens as feeling compassion for marginalized people, both within one’s country and across borders, and acting through social justice movements to help. Global citizens are posited to display their concern for social justice by evaluating and identifying global injustices and disparities (Morais and Ogden, 2011) and actively challenging injustices (Gibson, Rimmington, and Landwehr-Brown, 2008). In effect, global citizens value social justice and work to correct injustices occurring around the world. Environmental beliefs are a set of values related to protecting the natural environment and acting in environmentally sustainable manner. McIntyre-Mills (2000) suggests that because all humans rely on the environment to survive, global citizens show concern and act in ways that promote protection of the environment. Global citizens are posited to feel a duty to the planet (O’Byrne, 2003), responsibility to future generations to protect the environment from pollution (Heater, 2000), express concern for environmental issues, and display a commitment for sustainable development (Gibson et al., 2008). Tarrant (2010) proposes that awareness of global ecological threats and felt obligation to act in environmentally responsible ways leads global citizens to work for environmental causes (e.g., support environmental policies, purchase products from companies that produce goods in ways that do not harm the environment). Together, global citizens care about environmental problems and subsequently act locally (e.g., recycling, energy conservation) and globally (e.g., work with environmental groups that aim to protect the environment) to mitigate them. Intergroup helping is defined as behaviors that aid outgroup members, and are reflected in behaviors such as donating to charity, volunteering locally, and working with transnational organizations (e.g., Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders) to help others globally. Thus, global citizens often act in local organizations that have a global focus (Dower, 2002a). Dower states that this outcome reflects an adage of “intend globally, act locally” (p. 33). Thus, global citizens contribute to or assist global organizations, advance prosocial global agendas (Morais and Ogden, 2011), and identify and work to reduce global problems (Arcaro, 2009). Together, global citizens desire to help others is inextricably linked with a felt responsibility to act. Global citizenship is associated with the acceptance of a moral duty, obligation, or responsibility to act for the betterment of the world (Dower, 2002a, 2002b, 2008). Theorists describe this felt obligation to act as an acceptance of the shared responsibility to solve the common problems of the world (Osler and Vincent, 2002), obligations to help marginalized peoples (Dower, 2008), a commitment to civic action to improve the world (Banks, 2001), participation in democratic political processes (Ibrahim, 2005), and service in the community (Golmohamad, 2008). Indeed, for many theorists a felt responsibility to act for humanity is the key component of global citizenship (Caruana, 2010; Hovey and Weinberg, 2009; O’Byrne, 2003; Schattle, 2008). The acts of global citizens are often characterized as grassroots movements opposing global institutions that further inequality, thus connecting global citizenship values with a bottom-up perspective of globalization (Carter, 2005;

124

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

Caruana, 2010; Falk, 1993; Pitty et al., 2008). For example, consumers can act as global citizens by boycotting brands and products that harm people or the environment in other countries (Carter, 2005) and purchase products from socially and environmentally responsible companies (McGregor, 2003). To summarize, global citizens are posited to feel empathy for others; value diversity, social justice, environmental sustainability, and intergroup helping; and feel a responsibility to act for the betterment of the world. Although the literature regarding global citizenship spans diverse disciplines and perspectives (e.g., political, moral, developmental, educational), the above themes are consistently highlighted when discussing the meaning of global citizenship. In line with prior theorizing outlined above, we define global citizenship as awareness, caring, and embracing cultural diversity while promoting social justice and sustainability, coupled with a sense of responsibility to act (Pierce, Reysen, and KatzarskaMiller, 2010).

CONCEPTIONS OF ANTECEDENTS TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP We posit that key determinants to becoming a global citizen include global awareness and one’s environmental context. Global awareness has been described in multiple ways, such as a recognition of our common humanity and the felt sense of belongingness with the global community (Osler and Vincent, 2002), an understanding that one’s local behaviors have global consequences (Morais and Ogden, 2011), a holistic understanding of the world or world-mindedness (Richardson, 2008), thinking in an expansive way (Golmohamad, 2008), taking a global perspective (Chickering and Braskamp, 2009), awareness of interconnectedness with the world (Banks, 2001), sense of membership in a global community (Golmohamad, 2009), knowledge of globalization and the effect on everyday lives (Gibson et al., 2008), knowledge of the world and the ability to view the self as part of a heterogeneous world (Nussbaum, 2009), and a perspective beyond national boundaries (Pike, 2000). Taken together, the literature suggests that global citizenship requires an awareness of others, and the cognizance of interconnectedness with others (Che, Spearman, and Manizade, 2009; Davies and Pike, 2009; Dower, 2002a; Hovey and Weinberg, 2009; Oxfam, 1997). Global awareness is posited to precede global citizenship (Walkington, 1999). When asked, self-described global citizens indicate that global awareness was the first step toward a greater global perspective and action toward helping others (Schattle, 2008). Hanvey (1976) argues that individuals move through increasing levels of planetary awareness (e.g., consciousness of varying perspectives, cross-cultural awareness, knowledge of global dynamics) to become global citizens. Dower (2002a, 2002b, 2008) suggests that everyone is a global citizen, however due to lack of awareness of the identity, people are unable to recognize and accept one’s global membership. Each perspective suggests that an awareness of one’s interconnectedness with others precedes viewing the self as a global citizen. The environments in which individuals are embedded engender global awareness and subsequent identification with global citizens. Consistent with the notion of intentional worlds (Shweder, 1990) and mutual constitution (see Adams and Markus, 2004), individuals live in cultural settings that afford particular identities, behaviors, values, and beliefs. If the settings in which individuals engage on a daily basis, or engage in while traveling (e.g., study

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

125

abroad), contain patterns reflecting global citizen values, then individuals may be more likely to identify with global citizens. Schattle (2008) conducted interviews with self-identified global citizens and found a variety of explanations regarding the origins of their global citizenship-related values including study abroad, international travel, growing up in diverse communities, and influential mentors in school. Indeed, Chickering and Braskamp (2009) show that studying abroad increases self-reported global citizenship identity. The interview and research evidence suggest that exposure to different world perspectives and global citizen value-laden cultural patterns lead to greater awareness. Thus, the second antecedent to global citizenship is therefore the normative patterns connected with the cultural settings in which individuals are embedded. Proponents for global citizenship education (e.g., Pike, 2008; Shallcross and Robinson, 2006; Young and Commins, 2002) have noted the need for a larger cultural change to engender global citizen identity in students. Shallcross and Robinson (2006) highlight the role of the school to display patterns of global citizenship and to afford students the opportunity to apply knowledge and values to real world issues in order to prompt global citizen identity. Young and Commins (2002) suggest the entirety of students’ daily environments (i.e., schools, parents, friends, and community members) should model global citizen values and behaviors. Davies and Reid (2005) encourage teachers to move beyond teaching knowledge and, instead, immerse students in global citizen issues and applied approaches, such as school government and community service (Davies, 2006). Pike (2008) posits that global citizen patterns and values are not embedded in the majority of peoples’ everyday lives, and calls on educators to weave those patterns into the educational system in order to spread them to other social and institutional structures. In effect, global citizenship education theorists recognize the influence of cultural patterns at school, but also the need to expand participation in these values and actions to students’ wider community (i.e., settings outside the classroom).

A SOCIAL IDENTITY PERSPECTIVE OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Critics of global citizenship (e.g., Bowden, 2003; Woolf, 2010) eschew the concept as idealist and untenable because there is no concrete legal recognition of global group membership (for a review of such arguments see Carter, 2005; Dower, 2002a). We argue that membership in the group “global citizen” is psychological in nature. As suggested by Golmohamad (2008), global citizenship is a mindset or attitude one takes. Individuals perceive themselves to be global citizens and feel a psychological connection with global citizens as a group. Indeed, following a social identity perspective, individuals can perceive themselves to be members of groups that do not have legal rights or organizational structures (e.g., Reysen and Branscombe, 2010). Social identity (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) and self-categorization (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, and Wetherell, 1987) theories, when combined, afford an integrated dynamic theoretical framework (i.e., social identity perspective) to explain intra and intergroup phenomena (Hogg and Smith, 2007; Reicher, Spears, and Haslam, 2010). Individuals feel differing levels of identification (i.e., felt connection) with social groups. Each group has a prototype or set of interrelated attributes (i.e., group content), that are specific to that group (Hogg and Smith, 2007; Turner, 1991). When a particular group membership is salient, the

126

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

more strongly one identifies with the group the more depersonalization and self-stereotyping occur in line with the group’s content such as norms, beliefs, values, attitudes, behaviors (Turner et al., 1987), emotions (Reysen and Branscombe, 2008), and personality (Jenkins, Reysen, and Katzarska-Miller, 2012). In effect, when an identity is salient, one’s degree of identification with the group predicts adherence to the group’s normative content (Ashforth, Harrison, and Corley, 2008; Hogg and Reid, 2006; Turner et al., 1987). For a more detailed explanation of both theories see Postmes and Branscombe (2010). Turner et al. (1987) posits that groups have differing levels of inclusiveness, with human as the most inclusive social identity. Subsequent theorizing and research shows that salience of inclusive social categories result in prosocial values and behaviors toward outgroup members (Crisp and Hewstone, 2007; Dovidio, Gaertner, and Saguy, 2007). For example, Buchan et al. (2011) asked participants to rate their degree of identification with a “world community”, assign tokens to a world charity, and rate their concern for global issues (e.g., global warming, income disparity). The researchers found that identification with the world community predicted greater giving to the world charity (beyond national and local identification), and global identification positively correlated with concern for global issues. Together, the research has emphasized the notion that the content of a particular group identity is important for understanding how highly identified group members will think and act when a particular social identity is salient. Applied to global citizenship, when a global citizen identity is salient, individuals who are highly identified will adhere to the group’s norms (i.e., prosocial values and behaviors).

EVIDENCE OF ANTECEDENTS AND OUTCOMES OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Following a social identity perspective, Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2012) tested a structural model of antecedents and outcomes to identifying as a global citizen. University students from a variety of majors completed measures regarding their normative environment (friends and family value and prescribe being a global citizen), global awareness (knowledge of and connection to the world), global citizenship identification (psychological connection to the category global citizen), intergroup empathy, valuing diversity, social justice, environmental sustainability, intergroup helping, and felt responsibility to act for the betterment of the world. Supporting past theory (Andrzejewski and Alessio, 1999; Davies, 2006; Dower, 2002a, 2002b, 2008; Hanvey, 1976; Oxfam, 1997; Pike, 2008; Schattle, 2008; Walkington, 1999), students’ normative environment and global awareness (antecedents) significantly predicted identification with global citizens, and global citizenship identification predicted endorsement of the prosocial values (outcomes) representing the content of the identity (e.g., intergroup empathy and helping). In other words, the degree to which one’s normative context prescribes being a global citizen, and one’s awareness of and connection to others in the world lead to greater identification with global citizens. Identification with the category global citizen subsequently leads to endorsement of a variety of prosocial values and behaviors (see Figure 1 for the structural model of antecedents and outcomes of global citizenship identification).

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

127

Figure 1. Structural model of antecedents and outcomes of global citizenship.

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF NORMATIVE ENVIRONMENT AS A PATHWAY TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Everyday environments (e.g., home, school, work, cities) are embedded with cultural patterns (Adams and Markus, 2004). Through interactions with their everyday settings individuals are constantly producing, reproducing, and modifying the patterns that shape one’s culture and simultaneously prime and condition others residing in that cultural space. Everyday cultural settings not only prime and condition beliefs and behaviors, but also afford individuals’ social identities (Reysen and Levine, in press). If others (e.g., friends, family, school, media) in one’s cultural setting afford individuals the opportunity to view oneself as a global citizen, prescribe and value the identity, then individuals embedded in that environment will be more likely to strongly identify with global citizens. In a recent study, Blake, Pierce, Gibson, Reysen, and Katzarska-Miller (2011) asked students to rate their perception of whether their university encourages a global perspective (university normative environment) and measures of antecedents (normative environment, global awareness), identification, and outcomes (prosocial values) of global citizenship (see Figure 1 for the structural model of antecedents, identification, and outcomes of global citizenship). Students’ perception that the university environment encourages viewing oneself

128

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

as a global citizen predicted higher ratings of their normative environment (valued others prescribe being a global citizen) and global awareness (knowledge of and felt interconnectedness with the world). Supporting Reysen and Katzarska-Miller’s (2012) model, normative environment and global awareness then predicted greater global citizenship identification, and global citizenship identification predicted endorsement of prosocial values (e.g., environmental sustainability, social justice). Importantly, students’ perception that their university encouraged viewing the self as a global citizen indirectly influenced their endorsement of prosocial values through greater perceived normative environment, global awareness, and global citizenship identification. In other words, if students perceive their university’s culture as supportive of global citizenship they will identify more strongly with global citizens. The results of Blake et al.’s (2011) study support the notion that patterns reflecting global citizen values in the university setting can lead to greater global citizenship identification and endorsement of prosocial values and behaviors. Cultural patterns reflecting global citizen values do not need to be explicit or consciously apparent to influence students’ identification. Snider, Reysen, and Katzarska-Miller (in press) examined the effect of different framings of the message of globalization on students’ ingroup identification and endorsement of prosocial values. College students were randomly assigned to read a speech by a university administrator that described the negative (job market becoming competitive) or positive (job market becoming culturally diverse) impact of globalization on students’ future job prospects. In the control condition no speech was presented. Students rated their degree of global citizenship and school identification, positive emotions, academic motivation, valuing diversity, and desire to help others. The results showed that compared to the positive framing, describing globalization in negative terms lead to significantly lower global citizenship identification, positive emotion, motivation to succeed in college, valuing diversity, and desire to help others. Furthermore, students’ identification with global citizens mediated the relationship between the manipulation of globalization message and students’ positive emotions, academic motivation, valuing diversity, and desire to help others. The results highlight the influence that school officials, as interactants in students’ school normative environment, have on students’ connection to global citizens, desire to succeed in college, and prosocial values and behaviors. Students’ normative environment, especially school settings, can also directly influence students’ level of global awareness.

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF GLOBAL AWARENESS AS A PATHWAY TO GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Theorists suggest (Dower, 2002a, 2002b, 2008; Hanvey, 1976; Schattle, 2008; Walkington, 1999) and research (Reysen and Katzarska-Miller, 2012) supports the notion that global awareness is an antecedent to viewing the self as a global citizen. Based on prior theory (Banks, 2001; Gibson et al., 2008; Morais and Ogden, 2011), we define global awareness as one’s knowledge of the world and understanding of one’s interconnectedness with others in the world. School settings are apt environments in which educators can raise students’ global awareness to engender global citizenship. For example, students’ perception that a college course raises their global awareness predicts greater global citizenship

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

129

identification and subsequent endorsement of prosocial values and behaviors (Blake et al., 2011). Reysen, Larey, and Katzarska-Miller (2012) recently examined the influence of participation in college courses infused with global curriculum on the antecedents, identification, and outcomes (i.e., prosocial values) of global citizenship. Students (N = 768) enrolled in a variety classes (e.g., business, English, psychology, agriculture) completed measures regarding global citizenship at the beginning and end of the semester. The number of global citizen related words (e.g., culture, responsibility, international, globalization, environment, justice, helping, rights, interconnected) contained in each class’ syllabus was tabulated to construct an index representing the degree the class was infused with global curriculum. While controlling for students’ ratings at the beginning of the semester and item measurement error, the greater number of global citizen related words in the class syllabus predicted higher global awareness scores at the end of the semester. Furthermore, students’ post-semester global awareness predicted greater global citizenship identification, and identification with global citizens predicted greater endorsement of the prosocial values at the end of the semester. In other words, controlling for students’ pre-semester attitudes, classes with more global words in the syllabus predicted increased global awareness, which led to greater global citizenship identification, which led to greater endorsement of prosocial values. The results show the influence of participation in classes infused with global curriculum on the change in students’ global awareness, global citizenship identification, and related prosocial values. Reysen, Katzarska-Miller, Gibson, and Hobson (2012) provide further evidence of the relationship between global awareness and global citizenship identification. In two studies, Reysen and colleagues examined the relationship between global knowledge, and antecedents, identification, and outcomes of global citizenship. In Study 1, participants completed a multiple-choice factual world knowledge questionnaire? (e.g., “How many different languages are spoken in the world?”) prior to completing the global citizen measures. Results showed that students’ perception of their global awareness was more strongly related to global citizenship identification than the amount of correct answers on a factual test of world knowledge. Factual knowledge influenced global citizenship identification, but the relationship was not direct; the effect of factual knowledge on global citizenship identification was carried through students’ normative environment and perception of global awareness. Thus, knowing facts about the world predicted students’ normative environment and perception of their global awareness leading to higher identification with global citizens. Having found perception of knowledge (global awareness) to be the proximal predictor of global citizenship, the researchers manipulated perceived global awareness in Study 2. In the second study, Reysen and colleagues (2012) invited participants to a laboratory and gave participants a cover story describing the study as focused on validation of a new measure of global awareness. After completing the same factual world knowledge questionnaire as Study 1, students waited while in an adjacent room (within hearing distance of the participant) the experimenter printed a blank sheet of paper, creating the illusion of printing the participant’s results. In actuality, the experimenter randomly selected a manila envelope containing one of three feedback sheets: (1) low global awareness score, (2) high global awareness score, or (3) no score with an explanation that the quiz is still undergoing validation (control condition). The experimenter, blind to which condition participants were

130

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

in, gave the envelope to the student and instructed the student to review their score and complete an additional survey (global citizen measures). Participants who received a high quiz score rated their degree of normative environment, global awareness, and global citizenship identification significantly higher than participants who received a low quiz score. Importantly, the manipulation of global knowledge feedback predicted normative environment and global awareness, which then predicted global citizenship identification, which then predicted endorsement of the prosocial values. Together, the results of the current research support the notion that perceived global awareness leads to identifying with global citizens.

ENGENDERING GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS Theorists and current research consistently link viewing the self as a global citizen with prosocial values and behaviors. Given the array of beneficial outcomes associated with global citizenship identification, universities are understandably striving to internationalize higher education to engender such identity in students (Sperandio et al., 2010). Yet, the concept of global citizenship education has been mired in ambiguity. This lack of clarity results in unclear academic standards, measurement, and avoidance by faculty who may desire incorporation of global citizen education in their classes. For example, survey research shows that pre-service instructors express a desire to include global citizenship related components in their curriculum, but lack the knowledge and confidence regarding implementation (see Reimer and McLean, 2009). Thus, compared to other nations, educational institutions in the United States have been slow to incorporate global education into the curriculum leading to students’ lack of global awareness (see Zhao, Lin, and Hoge, 2007). To aid in reducing the ambiguity surrounding global citizenship education, the empirical findings presented in this chapter point to clear and measurable antecedents and outcomes to viewing the self as a global citizen. Based on past theory and research we suggest instructors aim their efforts at influencing students’ normative environment and global awareness. Following past research (Reysen and Katzarska-Miller, 2012), influencing these antecedents will lead to greater global citizenship identification and subsequently influence prosocial values and behaviors. Additionally, interventions can be adapted to influence both antecedents simultaneously to increase the probability of engendering students’ global citizenship. For example, including non-western material in the curriculum (Reysen and Krueger, in press) may increase students’ global awareness and simultaneously place the instructor as a model of global citizen values in the students’ normative environment. One method to engender global citizenship identification in students is to raise their global awareness. As indicated in the prior sections of this chapter, global awareness contains two components: (1) knowledge of the world and (2) awareness of one’s interconnectedness to others in the world. As shown in prior research (Reysen, Katzarska-Miller, Gibson, and Hobson, 2012), factual knowledge leads to greater perceived global awareness, which leads to increased global citizenship identification and prosocial values. A second method to increase global awareness is highlighting the interconnectedness of people in the globalized world. Instructors have the ability to revise their curriculum by including more information that recognizes the diversity and focuses on understanding local and global inequalities (Arnot,

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

131

2009), highlight resistance movements or other battles against oppression (O’Connor and Zeichner, 2011), and examine the same subject from multiple perspectives (Veugelers, 2011). Breithorde and Swiniarski (1999) suggest focusing on students’ social experiences, exploring the context and ramifications of the experience, and through discussion, highlighting the notion that the experiences are social and global in nature. Additionally, instructors can begin to question students’ perception of what are considered “normal” attitudes and behavior in relation to the attitudes and behaviors of others in the world (Merryfield, Lo, and Po, 2008; Nussbaum, 2002; Soudien, 2011). With greater access to the online resources there exists the opportunity to highlight the various perspectives on similar issues, or gain a greater understanding of current global problems (Berson and Berson, 2003; Crawford and Kirby, 2008), and more generally focus students’ attention on future global issues (Burns, 2008; Hicks, 2001). Furthermore, institutions could require, or instructors could encourage, a greater emphasis on foreign language learning (Byrnes, 2009; Clarke, 2004). Instructors can focus on similarities between cultures and the larger sociocultural influences on phenomenon (Adams, Biernat, Branscombe, Crandall, and Wrightsman, 2008), and highlight the shared fate of the earth (Golmohamad, 2009), or the interconnectedness of trade, people, and cultural patterns worldwide. In general, revising curriculum to highlight global connections, nonwestern sources of information, and relationships with others outside one’s cultural setting can raise global awareness to engender global citizenship (Fielden, 2007). Second, influencing or changing students’ normative environment can lead to greater global citizenship. Individuals automatically enact habits that are conditioned and cued by aspects in one’s environment (Adams and Markus, 2004). Therefore, changing students’ normative environment from one that cues ethnocentric values to settings with diverse values reflecting openness and global citizenship could automatically influence attitudes (see Adams et al., 2008). To accomplish this task, instructors have the opportunity to present themselves as models of global citizenship, influence the settings in which students engage to reflect global citizen values, and encourage students to engage in nonmainstream settings. For example, to influence students’ current settings instructors could work with community members to highlight global perspectives inside and outside of school (Andrzejewski, 2005). Instructors can also revise their curriculum to highlight the community’s ethnic diversity through assemblies, art, and music events. Such an approach highlights students’ current environment as globally infused. Indeed, students do not have to leave their current residence to engage in nonmainstream and culturally diverse settings. For example, instructors may change students’ normative environment through international collaboration between schools to exchange materials and information, similar to video pen-pals (Bovair and Griffith, 2003). Going one step further, instructors could utilize online international collaboration and communication to conduct action research (Gaudelli and Fernekes, 2004; Price, 2003), simulate a model UN (Gaudelli and Fernekes, 2004), and more generally focus students collaborative experience with students in other nations and cultures to solve simulated global problems (Johnson, Boyer, and Brown, 2011). In the above examples students’ normative environment is influenced by instructors who infuse or highlight their daily settings as globally connected; a second method of influencing students’ normative environment is to actually change their environment. Schools and instructors can encourage students to study abroad (Goodman, 2009). Indeed, studying abroad has been shown to increase students’ global citizenship (Chickering and Braskamp, 2009) and the experience can be further enhanced through the completion of service learning while abroad (Greenberg, 2008). Thus,

132

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

students’ normative environment can lead to greater global citizenship by instructors either changing the current environment or encouraging students to engage in nonmainstream environments. However, instructors should consistently infuse settings or encourage engagement with environments that contain patterns of global citizen values and behaviors and highlight the interconnectedness of humans.

CONCLUSION Globalization has lead to an emphasis on internationalizing education institutions and promoting global education (Maringe, 2010). Although global citizenship education programs have spread (Hicks, 2003), theorists have yet to converge on a definition, conceptualization or academic standards (Sperandio et al., 2010). To provide much needed clarity to the concept of global citizenship we have reviewed past theoretical descriptions of the antecedents and outcomes to viewing the self as a global citizen. We define global citizenship as awareness, caring, and embracing cultural diversity while promoting social justice and sustainability, coupled with a sense of responsibility to act (Pierce, Reysen, and Katzarska-Miller, 2010; Snider et al., in press). Following an empirically established theoretical framework (social identity perspective), we reviewed recent research showing the antecedents (normative environment, global awareness) and outcomes (intergroup empathy, valuing diversity, social justice, environmental sustainability, intergroup helping, and felt responsibility to act for the betterment of the world) of global citizenship identification. Lastly, based on past theory and research, we provided practical applications to engender global citizenship in educational settings. Although educating for global citizenship may appear daunting, there exist a multitude of simple actions and interventions that instructors can make (e.g., infusing nonwestern sources in curriculum, highlighting human interconnectedness) to provide pathways for students to cultivate a global citizen identity.

REFERENCES Adams, G., Biernat, M., Branscombe, N. R., Crandall, C. S., and Wrightsman, L. S. (2008). Beyond prejudice: Toward a sociocultural psychology of racism and oppression. In G. Adams, M. Biernat, N. R. Branscombe, C. S. Crandall, and L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Commemorating Brown: The social psychology of racism and discrimination (pp. 215246). Washington, DC: APA Books. Adams, G., and Markus, H. R. (2004). Toward a conception of culture suitable for a social psychology of culture. In M. Schaller and C. S. Crandall (Eds.), The psychological foundations of culture (pp. 335-360). Mahwah, N. J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Andrzejewski, J. (2005). The social justice, peace, and environmental education standards project. Multicultural Perspectives, 7, 8-16. Andrzejewski, J., and Alessio, J. (1999). Education for global citizenship and social responsibility. (Monograph). Burlington, V. T: John Dewey Project on Progressive Education.

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

133

Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W. W. Norton.Arcaro, T. (2009). Beyond the pledge of allegiance: Becoming a responsible world citizen. In T. Arcaro and R. Haskell (Eds.), Understanding the global experience: Becoming a responsible world citizen (pp. 3-25). New York: Allyn and Bacon. Arnot, M. (2009). A global conscience collective?: Incorporating gender injustices into global citizenship education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4, 117-132. Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., and Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34, 325-374. Banks, J. A. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 5-16. Basirico, L. A., and Bolin, A. (2009). The joy of culture: A beginner’s guide to understanding and appreciating cultural diversity. In T. Arcaro and R. Haskell (Eds.), Understanding the global experience: Becoming a responsible world citizen (pp. 26-48). New York: Allyn and Bacon. Berson, I. R., and Berson, M. J. (2003). Digital literacy for effective citizenship: Cybersafety, digital awareness, and media literacy. Social Education, 67, 164-167. Blake, M. E., Pierce, L., Gibson, L., Reysen, S., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2011). School environment and global citizenship. Manuscript in preparation. Bovair, K., and Griffith, R. (2003). Global citizenship: From concept to classroom. Support for Learning, 18, 107-111. Bowden, B. (2003). The perils of global citizenship. Citizenship studies, 7, 349-362. Breithorde, M. L., and Swiniarski, L. (1999). Constructivism and reconstructionism: Educating teachers for world citizenship. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 24, 1-17. Buchan, N. R., Brewer, M. B., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R. K., Fatas, E., and Foddy, M. (2011). Global social identity and global cooperation. Psychological Science, 22, 821-828. Burns, K. (2008). (re)Imagining the global, rethinking gender in education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29, 343-357. Byrnes, H. (2009). The role of foreign language departments in internationalizing the curriculum. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 607-609. Carter, A. (2005). Migration and cultural diversity: Implications for national and global citizenship. In S.-H. Tan (Ed.), Challenging citizenship: Group membership and cultural identity in a global age (pp. 15-30). Hampshire, UK: Ashgate. Caruana, V. (2010). Global citizenship for all: Putting the ‘higher’ back into UK higher education? In F. Maringe and N. Foskett (Eds.), Globalization and internationalization in higher education: Theoretical, strategic and management perspectives (pp. 51-64). London: Continuum International Publishing. Che, S. M., Spearman, M., and Manizade, A. (2009). Constructive disequilibrium: Cognitive and emotional development through dissonant experiences in less familiar destinations. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship (pp. 99-116). New York: Routledge. Chickering, A., and Braskamp, L. A. (2009). Developing a global perspective for personal and social responsibility. Peer Review, 11, 27-30. Clarke, V. (2004). Students’ global awareness and attitudes to internationalism in a world of cultural convergence. Journal of Research in International Education, 3, 51-70.

134

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

Crawford, E. O., and Kirby, M. M. (2008). Fostering students’ global awareness: Technology applications in social studies teaching and learning. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 2, 56-73. Crisp, R. J., and Hewstone, M. (2007). Multiple social categorization. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 163-254. Davies, I., and Pike, G. (2009). Global citizenship education: Challenges and possibilities. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship (pp. 61-77). New York: Routledge. Davies, I., and Reid, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique of ‘global education’ and ‘citizenship education.’ British Journal of Educational Studies, 53, 66-89. Davies, L. (2006). Global citizenship: abstraction or framework for action. Educational Review, 58, 5-25. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Saguy, T. (2007). Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 296-330. Dower, N. (2002a). Global citizenship: Yes or no?. In N. Dower and J. Williams (Eds.), Global citizenship: A critical introduction (pp. 30-40). New York: Routledge. Dower, N. (2002b). Global ethics and global citizenship. In N. Dower and J. Williams (Eds.), Global citizenship: A critical introduction (pp. 146-157). New York: Routledge. Dower, N. (2008). Are we all global citizens or are only some of us global citizens? The relevance of this question to education. In A. A. Abdi and L. Shultz (Eds.), Educating for human rights and global citizenship (pp. 39-53). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Falk, R. (1993). The making of global citizenship. In J. Brecher, J. B. Childs, and J. Cutler (Eds.), Global visions: Beyond the new world order (pp. 39-52). Boston, MA: South End Press. Fielden, J. (2006, January). Internationalization and leadership: What are the issues? Paper presented at the Leadership and Development Challenges of Globalisation and Internationalisation Summit, London, UK. Fielden, J. (2007). Global horizons for UK universities. London: Council for Industry and Higher Education. Gaudelli, W., Fernekes, W. R. (2004). Teaching about global human rights for global citizenship. The Social Studies, 95, 16-26. Gibson, K. L., Rimmington, G. M., and Landwehr-Brown, M. (2008). Developing global awareness and responsible world citizenship with global learning. Roeper Review, 30, 11-23. Golmohamad, M. (2008). Global citizenship: From theory to practice, unlocking hearts and minds. In M. A. Peters, H. Blee, and A. Britton (Eds.), Global citizenship education: Philosophy, theory and pedagogy (pp. 521-533). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Golmohamad, M. (2009). Education for world citizenship: Beyond national allegiance. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41, 466-486. Goodman, A. E. (2009). Language learning and study abroad: The path to global citizenship. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 610-612. Greenberg, D. J. (2008). Teaching global citizenship, social change, and economic development in a history course: A course model in Latin American travel/service learning. The History Teacher, 41, 283-304.

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

135

Hanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. New York: Global Perspectives in Education. He, B. (2005). Citizenship and cultural equality. In S.-H. Tan (Ed.), Challenging citizenship: Group membership and cultural identity in a global age (pp. 151-168). Hampshire, UK: Ashgate. Heater, D. (2000). Does cosmopolitan thinking have a future? Review of International Studies, 26, 179-197. Heron, B. (2011). Challenging indifference to extreme poverty: Considering southern perspectives on global citizenship and change. Ethics and Economics, 8, 109-119. Hicks, D. (2001). Re-examining the future: The challenge for citizenship education. Educational Review, 53, 229-240. Hicks, D. (2003). Thirty years of global education: A reminder of key principles and precedents. Educational Review, 55, 265-275. Hogg, M. A., and Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7-30. Hogg, M. A., and Smith, J. R. (2007). Attitudes in social context: A social identity perspective. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 89-131. Hovey, R., and Weinberg, A. (2009). Global learning and the making of citizen diplomats. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship (pp. 33-48). New York: Routledge. Ibrahim, T. (2005). Global citizenship education: Mainstreaming the curriculum? Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 177-194. Jenkins, S., Reysen, S., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2012). Ingroup identification and personality. Journal of Interpersonal Relations, Intergroup Relations and Identity, 5, 9-16. Johnson, P. R., Boyer, M. A., and Brown, S. W. (2011). Vital interests: Cultivating global competence in the international studies classroom. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9, 503-519. Lewin, R. (2009). The quest for global citizenship through study abroad. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizenship (pp. xiii-xxii). New York: Routledge. Maringe, F. (2010). The meanings of globalization and internationalization in HE: Findings from a world survey. In F. Maringe and N. Foskett (Eds.), Globalization and internationalization in higher education: Theoretical, strategic and management perspectives (pp. 17-34). London: Continuum International Publishing. McGregor, S. L. T. (2003). Globalizing and humanizing consumer education: A new research agenda. Journal of the Home Economics Institute of Australia, 10, 2-9. McIntyre-Mills, J. J. (2000). Global citizenship and social movements: Creating transcultural webs of meaning for the new millennium. New York: Routledge. Merryfield, M. M., Lo, J. T.-Y., and Po, S. C. (2008). Worldmindedness: Taking off the blinders. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 2, 6-20. Morais, D. B., and Ogden, A. C. (2011). Initial development and validation of the global citizenship scale. Journal of Studies in International Education, 15, 445-466. Nussbaum, M. (2002). Education for citizenship in an era of global connection. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21, 289-303.

136

Stephen Reysen and Iva Katzarska-Miller

Nussbaum, M. C. (2009). Education for profit, education for freedom. Liberal Education, 95, 6-13. O’Byrne, D. J. (2003). The dimensions of global citizenship: Political identity beyond the nation-state. London: Frank Cass. O’Connor, K., and Zeichner, K. (2011). Preparing US teachers for critical global education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9, 521-536. Osler, A., and Vincent, K. (2002). Citizenship and the challenge of global education. Stokeon-Trent, UK: Trentham Books. Oxfam (1997). A curriculum for global citizenship. Oxford: Oxfam. Pierce, L., Reysen, S., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2010, November). The search for a definition of global citizenship. In S. Reysen (Chair), Global citizenship: Americans within the world. Symposium conducted at the 54th annual meeting of the American Studies Association of Texas, Commerce, TX. Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: In pursuit of meaning. Theory into Practice, 39, 64-73. Pike, G. (2008). Reconstructing the legend: Educating for global citizenship. In A. A. Abdi and L. Shultz (Eds.), Educating for human rights and global citizenship (pp. 223-237). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Pitty, R., Stokes, G., and Smith, G. (2008). Globalization and cosmopolitanism: Beyond populist nationalism and neoliberalism. In G. Stokes, R. Pitty, and G. Smith (Eds.), Global citizens: Australian activists for change (pp. 200-211). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Postmes, T., and Branscombe, N. R. (Eds.). (2010). Rediscovering social identity. New York: Psychology Press. Price, J. (2003). Get global!: A skills-based approach to active global citizenship. London: ActionAid. Reicher, S., Spears, R., and Haslam, S. A. (2010). The social identity approach in social psychology. In M. S. Wetherell and C. T. Mohanty (Eds.), Sage identities handbook (pp. 45-62). London: Sage. Reimer, K., and McLean, L. R. (2009). Conceptual clarity and connections: Global education and teacher candidates. Canadian Journal of Education, 32, 903-926. Reysen, S., and Branscombe, N. R. (2008). Belief in collective emotions as conforming to the group. Social Influence, 3, 171-188. Reysen, S., and Branscombe, N. R. (2010). Fanship and fandom: Comparisons between sport fans and non-sport fans. Journal of Sport Behavior, 33, 176-193. Reysen, S., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2012). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Psychology. Advance online publication. Reysen, S., Katzarska-Miller, I., Gibson, S. A., and Hobson, B. (2012). Global knowledge and global citizenship. Manuscript in preparation. Reysen, S., and Krueger, L. E. (in press). How to survive and thrive during your first years in a tenure-track job. APS Observer. Reysen, S., Larey, L. W., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2012). College course curriculum and global citizenship. International Journal for Development Education and Global Learning, 4, 27-39.

Student Pathways to Global Citizenship

137

Reysen, S., and Levine, R. V. (in press). People, culture, and place: An integrative approach to predicting helping toward strangers. In P. J. Rentfrow (Ed.), Psychological geography. Washington DC: APA. Reysen, S., Pierce, L., Spencer, C., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (2010) Exploring the content of global citizenship identity. Manuscript submitted for publication. Richardson, G. (2008). Conflicting imaginaries: Global citizenship education in Canada as a site of contestation. In M. A. Peters, H. Blee, and A. Britton (Eds.), Global citizenship education: Philosophy, theory and pedagogy (pp. 115-132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Schattle, H. (2008). The practices of global citizenship. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Shallcross, T., and Robinson, J. (2006). Education for sustainable development as applied global citizenship and environmental justice. In T. Shallcross, J. Robinson, P. Price, and A. Wals (Eds.), Creating sustainable environments in our schools (pp. 175-193). Stokeon-Trent, UK: Trentham Books. Shweder, R. A. (1990). Cultural psychology—what is it? In J. Stigler, R. Shweder, and G. Herdt (Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 146). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Snider, J. S., Reysen, S., and Katzarska-Miller, I. (in press). How we frame the message of globalization matters. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Soudien, C. (2011). Interrogating the nature of the ‘universal’ in South Africa’s new educational order. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9, 323-336. Sperandio, J., Grudzinski-Hall, M., and Stewart-Gambino, H. (2010). Developing an undergraduate global citizenship program: Challenges of definition and assessment. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22, 12-22. Stokes, G. (2008). Global citizenship in Australia: Theory and practice. In G. Stokes, R. Pitty, and G. Smith (Eds.), Global citizens: Australian activists for change (pp. 1-21). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H., and Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. Austin and S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Tarrant, M. A. (2010). A conceptual framework for exploring the role of studies abroad in nurturing global citizenship. Journal of Studies in International Education, 14, 433-451. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., and Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Veugelers, W. (2011). The moral and the political in global citizenship: Appreciating differences in education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9, 473-485. Walkington, H. (1999). Theory into practice: Global citizenship education. Sheffield, UK: Geographical Association. Woolf, M. (2010). Another mishegas: Global citizenship. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 19, 47-60. Young, M., and Commins, E. (2002). Global citizensip: The handbook for primary teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxfam. Zhao, Y., Lin, L., and Hoge, J. D. (2007). Establishing the need for cross-cultural and global issues research. International Education Journal, 8, 139-150.

In: Student Learning: Improving Practice Editor: Christopher Boyle

ISBN: 978-1-62618-887-7 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 10

ACTION-EMOTION STYLE, TEST ANXIETY AND RESILIENCE IN UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS Jesús de la Fuente1, María Cardelle-Elawar2, Paul Sander3 and David Putwain4 1

University of Almería, Spain Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, US 3 Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK 4 Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire, UK 2

ABSTRACT Introduction. The Action-Emotion Style (AES) is the combination of competitiveness and overwork characteristics, with emotions of impatience and hostility, based in the construct Type-A Behavior Pattern. Test Anxiety is an emotional reaction involved in adaptive or maladaptive processes when facing adverse or dangerous events. Resilience has been defined as a person or group’s capacity to continue moving forward toward the future, despite destabilizing events, difficult life conditions and sometimes serious traumas. The objective of the present research is to establish the relationship between characteristics of action-emotion style with test anxiety and the resilience constructs. Method. The sample was composed of 121 students of the Psychology Degree Program at the University of Almería. The measures used were: (1) The Jenkins Activity Survey for students-Form H (JASE-H), Spanish version, designed to measure AES. (2) Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI-80), Spanish version. This questionnaire is a reduced, validated adaptation of the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). (3) Resilience, the Connor-Davison Resilience Inventory, Spanish version was used. Pearson correlation analyses, ANOVAs and MANOVAs were used to analyse data. Results. Results showed: (1) Significant positive association between both competitive-hardworking and impatience-hostility, and test anxiety; (2) significant positive association between competitive-hardworking characteristics and resilience, and a negative association between impatience-hostility and resilience. The level of actionemotion style had a significant main effect. Conclusion. Evidence is offered to defend the value of the construct AES for detecting possible learning difficulties stemming from students’ experience of

140

Jesús de la Fuente, María Cardelle-Elawar, Paul Sander et al. achievement motivation and of certain negative feelings while learning at university, especially in stressful situations.

Keywords: Action-emotion style, test anxiety, resilience, stress academic, high education

INTRODUCTION University education is undergoing a profound change with the main exponent of this change being the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). The innovations resulting from the creation of the EHEA have brought about new demands on both teachers and students, many of which are the product of a restructuring of the teaching-learning process (Biggs, 2001; Elliot and Dweck, 2007; Entwistle and Peterson, 2004). In this process, students take on a more active role in constructing their own learning with teachers facilitating in the construction of their learning by advising, orienting and helping them resolve difficulties that arise along the way (De la Fuente and Justicia, 2007).

The University Academic Context as a Presage Variable of Stress The academic context is important because it can operate as a variable that induces or reduces stress. The topic of stress, as seen from different fields of knowledge, has been well studied during the 20th century, generating a series of theoretical perspectives for both pure and applied research in this area (Barraza, 2005). Historically, there have been diverse conceptions of stress. The early studies understood stress from a physiological or biochemical viewpoint, emphasizing the importance of the organic response, and focusing on the internal processes of the subject. The more psychological and social viewpoints that came later are more interested in the situations that generate stress., For example the interactive theory of stress by Lazarus and collaborators which places more emphasis on interrelationships and mediational or transactional and appraisal processes (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984; Folkman and Moskowitz, 2004).

Action-Emotion Style as a Motivational-Affective, Presage Variable of Academic Stress The construct Action-Emotion Style, (AES; De la Fuente, 2004, 2008, 2011) is a variable that is based on the psychological construct called the Type-A Behavior Pattern, (TABP; Bermúdez, Pérez-García and Sánchez-Elvira, 1990, 1991). However, there are certain differences. The TABP emerged within the healthcare context, in order to explain certain characteristics or a certain behavioral pattern in response to stress, found in subjects with high coronary risk, and in an attempt to establish which elements of this behavior are harmful or protective. The AES, however, has application within an educational context to explain

Action-Emotion Style, Test Anxiety and Resilience in Undergraduate Students

141

differences in students’ achievement motivation. It assumes that the components involved are found in different combinations within the population, and can explain academic performance, a product variable in the Biggs Model (Biggs, 2001). In fact, a clear relationship has already been demonstrated between characteristic behaviors of the competitivehardworking component, and academic performance in university students (De la Fuente and Cardelle, 2009). De la Fuente (1998, 2004, 2008) described Action-Emotion Style (AES) as a person variable of achievement motivation, resulting from the combined interrelation of the different components of the Type A behavior pattern, when interacting with the academic learning process at university. Not all components of TABP or AES (competitive, hardworking, impatience, hostility) that form part of the construct were found to have the same effect on learning. This finding left open the possibility of establishing different student profiles with different combinations of elements, based on relatively stable behaviors and emotions – or achievement motivation styles – which students manifest to a greater or lesser degree when performing learning activities. Prior studies clearly established different student groups in terms of their achievement motivation style (e.g. De la Fuente, 2011). The combination of the motivational-affective characteristics of competitiveness and overwork, with emotions of impatience and hostility, leads to a classification with five categories of action-emotion style: 1). Type B (low in achievement motivation and negative emotionality), 2). Impatient-hostile Type (low in achievement motivation and high in negative emotionality), 3). Medium Type (medium in both aspects), 4). Competitivehardworking Type (high in achievement motivation and low in negative emotionality), and 5). Type A (high in both).

Test Anxiety as a Process Variable of Academic Stress In order to understand the nature of anxiety and its effects on performance, it is helpful to conceptualize it in terms of its biological-adaptive function (Spielberger, 1980). Anxiety is an emotional reaction involved in adaptive processes when facing adverse or dangerous events. More specifically, its action serves the function of preventing harm, by generating preparatory responses. For this purpose, anxiety uses a double mechanism of action. The first is the perception of a threat through cognitive mechanisms, which is followed by emotional behavior, and has to do with mobilizing resources to avoid the threat. These resources may be generic, and either physiological (increased sympathetic activity of the autonomic nervous system), motoric (increased muscular tension and faster movements) or cognitive (lower thresholds of alertness and vigilance). Or, they may have an instrumental nature, directly connected to the demands of the situation (studying longer, asking others for help, etc.). It is precisely in this instrumental aspect where Action-Emotion Style has a fundamental influence. The Test Anxiety construct is a measurement of anxiety in test situations. The first component, of this construct is the worrying, interfering reoccurring thoughts during the activity which are a consequence of perceiving the situation to be threatening, leading to a preoccupation with failure. Associated with this is an awareness of autonomic arousal.

142

Jesús de la Fuente, María Cardelle-Elawar, Paul Sander et al.

Resilience as a Motivational-Affective Variable in the Learning Process It is also necessary to establish the relationship between action-emotion style and resilience, a personal variable that is currently attracting much interest (Bermejo, 2011; Forés and Grané, 2008). Traditionally, psychology has not given sufficient attention to this phenomenon, but in recent years resilience has become an object of study. From the etymological viewpoint, this term comes from the Latin saliere, meaning to jump backward, rebound, be repelled, and bounce back. The prefix re implies repeating or resuming. Resiliar means ‘to be revived or go forward, after having suffered a blow or having experienced a traumatic situation’ (Cyrulnik, Tomkiewicz, Guénard, Vanistendael, Manciaux et al., 2004, p.12). In recent years, the concept of resilience has come to be seen as the quality that a person has to withstand and to recover from traumatic situations or losses. Resilience has been defined as a person’s or group’s capacity to continue moving forward, despite destabilizing events, difficult life conditions and sometimes serious traumas (Manciaux, Vanistendael, Lecomte, and Cyrulnik et al., 2001). In the educational context, resilience plays an important role. An individual measures his or her own strength in the face of different academic and social challenges and demands. Resilience involves confronting demanding situations and as a result the individual understands better his or her potential and thus develops confidence, grows stronger, learns and is able to respond effectively whilst preserving his or her mental health. The few studies that have addressed this topic have focused mainly on identifying resilient characteristics in a childhood population (Bradley et al., 1994), in populations that are victims of poverty (Sammeroff and Seiffer, 1992) or disasters, but the student population remains largely unexplored (Gargallo, Pérez, Serra, Sánchez, and Ross, 2002). The learning process involves considerable motivation, not only to adequately withstand the pace and demand for adaptation, but also to be able to self-regulate so as to respond adequately without becoming overwhelmed or falling into emotional disturbances such as defenselessness, apathy, depression, or anxiety (Álvarez and Cáceres, 2010). Some previous work on resilience in student populations associates these mental health manifestations with a deficiency in resilience (Bragagnolo et al., 2005). Likewise, research on stress in university students indicates that lack of self-confidence creates a pattern of vulnerability, leaving students with low resistance and lack of optimism about themselves, their environment and their possibilities for getting ahead (De la Fuente, Zapata, Sander and Putwain, in review). This in turn triggers psychological problems in the educational and social context. These disorders are not always addressed by institutional support services, and end up affecting academic performance, social relationships and the student’s own affectivity (Solórzano and Ramos, 2006).

Objectives and Hypothesis According to prior evidence, there are anxiety responses that are adaptive in their initial level of activation, and not adaptive at a higher level. With this logic, our first research objective was to establish relationships between AES, its dimensions and components, and Test Anxiety. The second objective was to establish an interdependent relationship between the two constructs. The first hypothesis states that competitiveness-overwork should have a

Action-Emotion Style, Test Anxiety and Resilience in Undergraduate Students

143

positive but weaker association with test anxiety, while impatience-hostility would have a strong association. Similarly, that competitiveness-overwork should have a positive association with resilience, while impatience-hostility would have no association. The second hypothesis states that AES will discriminate in terms of level of test anxiety and resilience, with higher scores in anxiety and lower in resilience of the impatient-hostile type, and lower scores of anxiety and high in resilience, in the competitive-hardworking type.

METHOD Participants The sample consisted of 121 students in the 2nd and 4th years of the Psychology Degree Program at the University of Almería (Spain), with a mean age of 21.06 (sd=3.10).

Instruments Action-emotion style. The Jenkins Activity Survey for students-Form H (JASE-H) was used. This scale, used for measuring the TABP, has been adapted (Bermúdez, Sánchez-Elvira and Pérez-García, 1991) from the Jenkins Activity Survey in its T version (Krantz, Glass, and Snyder, 1974), a version of TABP for students. It contains 4 factors: Impatience, Hostility, Competitiveness and Hardworking. In total, the questionnaire contains 32 items, each with a six-point Likert-type response format, so that the student participant must choose the extent to which an item applies to him or her. A value of one means that it is not at all applicable, and six means that it is totally applicable. The JASE-H offers both a global TABP score, obtained by adding the scores on each of the items, and specific score for each of the components that comprise the TABP. Regarding psychometric properties of this instrument, the correlations between the different subscales are low but significant, and correlations between each subscale and the total scale are also high (Bermúdez, Sánchez-Elvira and Pérez-García, 1991). Furthermore, the JASE-H presents high internal consistency (alpha coefficient of 0.85 for the total scale, and 0.81 for the Impatience-Hostility factors, 0.82 for Competitiveness and 0.70 for Hardworking) and high stability over time, both for the complete scale (0.68) and for each of the above factors (0.61, 0.76 and 0.70 respectively). Test Anxiety. The TAI-80, Test Anxiety Inventory, was used. This questionnaire is a reduced, validated Spanish adaptation of the STAI (State Trait Anxiety Inventory), by Spielberger (1980). This inventory provides a measurement of anxiety in test situations, addressing the two components explained above. The test contains two parts, with 10 questions each. Worry is evaluated through the existence of interfering and automatic thoughts that prevent the proper functioning of attention, working memory and performance on the assessment situation. The emotionality is evaluated through negative emotions, which can also be interfering. Reliability statistics are Alpha= .919, Guttman Split Half=.865 for worry, and Alpha= .819, Guttman Split Half=.834 for emotionality (Spielberger et al, 1980).

144

Jesús de la Fuente, María Cardelle-Elawar, Paul Sander et al.

Resilience. The Connor_Davidson Resilience Inventory (CD-RISC) was used (Connor and Davidson, 2003). This Likert-type scale is made up of 25 items, which address five factors: (1) personal competence, high standards and tenacity; (2) tolerance of negative affect and strengthening effects of stress; (3) positive acceptance of change, and secure relationships; (4) control, and (5) spiritual influences. Reliability and Validity measures reported by the authors are consistent. In our sample, the statistics are Alpha= .868, and Guttman Split Half=.714 (Connor and Davidson, 2003).

Procedure All participants received the necessary information about the research and about how to complete the different questionnaires. Completion of questionnaires was voluntary and took place during class hours in the months of February and June, 2011-12, respectively, for the first and second scale. The researchers followed the ethical standards as laid down by the American Psychological Assoication.

Design and Data Analysis A correlational and inferential design was used. Pearson bivariate correlations (twotailed) were carried out, as well as univariate analyses (ANOVAs) and multivariate analyses (MANOVAs). In order to determine the type of AES, cluster analysis was carried out, establishing three levels (low-medium-high) for each dimension. Thus, the five groups were established as combinations of the low and high levels. For example, Type 2 (impatienthostile) is the combination of a high level of impatience-hostility and a low level of competitiveness-overwork. The remaining students that did not fit into the classification were discarded which resulted in a total of 68 students that remained out of the initial sample of 121.

Results There was a significant, positive correlation of both dimensions of Action-Emotion Style and test anxiety. Specifically the dimensions associated with test anxiety are overwork and impatience. See Table 1. The ANOVA performed between Action-Emotion Style (AES) and total anxiety showed a significant main effect of AES, F(4,65)=3.923 (Index Pillai), p