In
1993 Angelo and Cross published the seminal, but now sadly out of
print Classroom Assessment
Techniques which suggested
that these small in-class activities (CATs for short) could be used
to practically, quickly and informally obtain feedback on teaching
activities and student needs. For example ’the muddiest point'
asks students to nominate on a slip of paper what was the most
difficult aspect of a class, the teacher then compiles these for an
overview of student knowledge in order to set the agenda for the next
class. Following on from section 6, these CATs are examples of
formative assessment but they also create opportunities to understand
the role of interactivity in student learning and providing feedback
to teachers.
Some
aspects of the Angelo & Cross book are quite dated now, but it
is evidence of a change in attitudes towards feedback and evaluation
as the children of the interactive generations were beginning to make
their presence in the classroom felt. In 1993 the students who had
grown up with Ataris and VCRs rather than passively consumed media
wanted a more active role in their learning. As newer generations of
digital natives are ever more accustomed to accelerated feedback
loops and engaging interactive media this energy can be effectively
harnessed in seeking fast effective course and unit feedback.
Since
1993 we have had plenty of technological innovations to engage
students in an interactive way even in very large classes.
Cloud-based systems make collaboration easier from a variety of
devices, LMSs have various feedback options, some classrooms have
electronic ’clicker' systems to allow for mass feedback and there
are plenty of mobile cloud-based interactive options which facilitate
different kinds of interactivity. For example the CSIRO has provided
a free texting alternative called VotApedia
which allows participants to use their mobile phones as clickers.
The technology evolves too quickly to have detailed description here.
Typical
of much informal feedback, it can be difficult to record and share
this information in a way that is useful to colleagues in other units
and to archive it in a manner accessible later on. It can be
difficult to connect each of these ’micro-feedback' opportunities
into the broader themes and issues at unit and even course level.
Too often the insights gained from these sorts of interactions are
ephemeral and are not as useful as they could be if used in shared
reflection, and we discuss the importance of being able to log, share
and reflect on feedback in section 12.
The
informality of this sort of feedback is its strength. Students are
more likely to honestly and authentically demonstrate their learning
when they are not being or feeling judged. Therefore the tone of
these interactive learning activities will be crucial in encouraging
students to participate fully without fear that they will be
ridiculed or criticised for making mistakes. This open approach is
often much more difficult to implement than it sounds and fostering
open discourse is an essential teaching skill. Students can develop
complicated bluffing behaviours to cover gaps in knowledge or skill
which require careful unpicking and long-term attention to the
classroom environment.
Interactivity
is a matter of design, in entertainment media or in the classroom is
a matter of exploration it involves permitting students to make
real choices and explore
the consequences of those
choices, either individually or through collective action.
Interactivity should be in the DNA of your courses and your delivery.
This is a different paradigm to the ’set curriculum'
content-oriented mindset of the past and connects directly to 21st
century student skills.
Lack
of timely feedback to students is one of the primary criticisms
learners have for their units and courses and better interactive
design builds in more frequent opportunities for feedback in ways
that will not necessarily require time intensive individual focus of
traditional assessment. Sometimes it is also important to emphasise
these as feedback opportunities and to label them as such to
students, otherwise learners may miss their significance, being used
to focusing on individualised summative feedback techniques.
Some
critics are concerned about the asymmetries that might develop in an
interactive classroom, where students' choices take them in different
directions and may fragment learning. Some of this anxiety is
probably a residue of the industrial standardised education approach
which applied factory principles to the classroom in order to embrace
scales of production, but also tried to ensure a fair minimum
standard for all learners. In 21st
century classroom this fairness is gained by adherence to learning
outcomes rather than standardising the course content and trying to
provide a singular learning experience of every student.
Methods
- CATs
- Interactive pathways and choices
- Negotiated assessment
- Micro-credentials and badges
Key
Points
- Interactive curriculum design provides opportunities for feedback loops providing students with feedback on their progress and teachers with feedback on how the unit and course are addressing student needs.
- Interactivity works best when embedded within course design and is performed regularly so that all participants are in the habit of making and respecting choices made.
- There are many technologies for managing interactivity, particularly cloud-based collaboration and use of mobile devices.
- Learning may be asymmetrical across the classroom and between different classes, but we ensure students are treated fairly, ethically and equally through adherence to learning outcomes.
- With any type of ’micro-feedback', documenting and sharing feedback is a challenge.
CATs
In a nutshell:
CATs ( or 'Classroom Assessment Techniques') are mini feedback exercises performed on an informal basis in the classroom or virtual classroom to get quick feedback on specific questions, for example topics that need more in-depth explanation.
Example Questions:
What is the muddiest point?
How can this knowledge be applied in practice?
What questions remain unanswered?
Reporting:
This is an informal process between the students and the teacher. There are no procedures to share and archive this sort of feedback, although it would be very useful to do so.
Pros:
An informal, flexible and dynamic process.
Gives students a stake in the evolution of a unit as it develops.
Provides a method of testing assumptions and intuition
Cons:
Informality may make the information of limited use beyond the classroom.
Caution:
As with other feedback techniques, students will quickly become disengaged if they do not feel that the feedback is making an impact. It is important to close the loop and let students know how the feedback is being responded to.
Interactive pathways and choice
In a nutshell:
Traditional coursework is conceived in a linear way, as a progression of weekly units along a single path to a single destination. Interactive learning environments have the potential of customisation and personalisation so that different learners arrive at the same outcomes through different pathways. Beyond choice of an assignment topic, 21st century student-centred environments have the potential to allow complex legitimate choices and these will provide feedback on student interests and needs.
Example Questions:
What topics do you want to focus on?
Which pathway do you want to take?
Reporting:
As learning spaces become more complex and increasingly mediated by technology, learning analytic systems will provide more comprehensive feedback on student choices and pathways through course material.
Pros:
More personalised environments which attend to student needs.
The end of the 'one size fits none', single speed classroom
Cons:
More complexity in design and administration.
Involves rethinking core aspects of unit design.
Caution:
This is an evolving set of practices and it can be difficult what direction learning technologies will take. Teachers may feel overwhelmed by the complexity of evolving interactive practice and may need careful support.
Negotiated assessment
In a nutshell:
While student assessment must be certain and compliant with university legal documentation, there is scope for flexibility and choice within those structures. Students are often presented with a choice of assignment topic, but negotiation can be more comprehensive and involve students in the design of project parameters, outcomes and the methods by which its success is to be evaluated.
Example Questions:
What are the goals for this project and how will we judge success?
Which community group do you want to represent in this submission?
Reporting:
Agreement will be between learners and teacher, but it can be useful to keep an ongoing record of different choices which will highlight student interests and aid in further unit and course development.
Pros:
Personalised assessment enhances student engagement
Supports WIL and other situated learning strategies
Cons:
Adds an additional administration layer
Caution:
This process has to be handled openly and transparently so that students feel they have been fairly treated in the process and that all learners are regarded equally, no matter what their personalised assessment involves.
Micro-credentials and badges
In a nutshell:
Badges provide a system of motivation and incentive that runs parallel to the formal assessment structure of a program. Further, they provide a method of attaching evidence to achievement that can be shared in portfolios and social media. As a form of feedback these systems give an insight into what motivates and drives students beyond the GPA.
Example Questions:
What badges (and therefore achievements) are most popular among the students?
What clusters of badges tend to go together?
How do unit badges intersect with each other and with course (or university) level badging? What does this mean for course materials and design?
Reporting:
As with many evolving technologies there is little in the way of formal review or reporting, but that is not to say that a course-level review of badging progress would not be a useful way of understanding overall drives and motivations for students in that course.
Pros:
Strong motivation backed by gamification
Exists parallel to assessment and does not have the same formal requirements
Cons:
A new an evolving technology that teachers will require support in understanding and applying.
Caution:
Evolving technologies and practices make this a volatile area but one which has gathered much academic interest internationally.
No comments:
Post a Comment