Cutting Edge Teaching Seminar

The Curse of Knowledge

Every professors has faced this question; why do my students not understand such an obvious concept? Anton and Ursula presented an excellent workshop at Professional and Organizational Development Conference that can help faculty understand why. First, our students are not us. We have a special knowledge in our expertise in our field. Elizabeth Newton demonstrated the curse of knowledge in a 1990 study. Participants in her study formed dyads. One participant was a "tapper" and the other participant was a "listener". The tapper was to tap out the rhythm of a well known song and the listener was to guess what the song was. Before tapping out the songs, the tapper predicted how many songs the listener would correctly guess. The tappers predicted the listeners would get 50% of the songs correct; that is 1 in 2 songs. The participants grossly overestimated. The listeners got only 1 out 40 songs correct. The tappers had a natural reaction; How could the listeners not get such an easy song? It is a temptation to ask, as many of the tappers did, how could the listeners be so stupid. Everyone has heard Twinkle Twinkle Little Star. It is obvious what I am tapping.

This brings me to a second point. The question "how could the listeners be so stupid" leads to an error. In fact, psychologists call it the fundamental attribution error. Humans make attributions, or judgments, about why other people behavior certain ways. Humans can make an external attribution; something from the environment is responsible the person's behavior. For example, you  talk to your friend Sally in the hall; She is sad and distracted. She tells you she just learned her mother has cancer. Thus, the sadness is caused by an external factor - learning her mother has cancer. Or humans can make an internal attribution, an internal characteristic or trait about another person. You noticed Sally is sad; therefore, you could make an internal attribution and assume she has depression. Quite often the internal attribution is incorrect; thus, the term fundamental attribution error. For a professor, implication is important for understanding student behavior. Why did this student not read, or why did this student turn in subpar work? Professors might be tempted to think the student is lazy or too stupid for this class. This would be engaging in the fundamental error, much like the flabbergasted tappers in the experiment above. Faculty developers have noted the importance of considering situational variables students when designing a course. It might be wise to also consider situational factors when students perform poorly on exams or assignments; it might also help professors to think of  adaptive solution for helping students perform better in the classes rather than dismissing students as lazy or stupid.

For another example of the Curse of Knowledge, click on the clip below of Sheldon from Big Bang Theory.
Big Bang Video

Community Engagement

In 2008, UVU received the Carnegie Foundation classification as an engaged university. Part of our mission is help students understand how their classes are relevant to their lives and how the can use what they have learned to help improve their communities. A high school from Bronx New York did just that. The school found a way to apply multidisciplinary subjects to the community to inspire learning and see the relevance of learning in their lives. I'll give you two examples. First, Students canoed down the Bronx river to gather data for scientific analysis to study ecology. Second, students had to learn to how to deal with rising water levels due to climate change. The students developed potential solutions to those problems.  UVU has resources for professors to develop and fund engaged learning projects in GEL grants or maybe service learning. Another project that might interest professors is the university project. This is a campus wide, multidisciplinary effort to tackle community problems. This year the university project is focusing on increasing literacy and numeracy in our local community.

Growth Mindsets in Action

The Scientific American has a blog post that nicely illustrates the benefits of a growth mindset. The author of the post, Andrea Kuszewski, describes the differing views intelligence and how a growth mindset gave have a significant impact on people. She reported of a case she had with an autistic child with an IQ of 80. After three years of training and hard work, the child's IQ was retest at 100, which is considered a normal IQ. That is a significant jump in a IQ scores.
The blog illustrates the best way to live up to one's cognitive potential, especially as one ages. She resolves some common misconception about intelligence as one ages, such as, that the game Sudoku is good way ward off cognitive decline. Sudoku is not the reason, per se, for the cognitive benefit; it's the challenging activities that is the reason for the buffer against the cognitive decline. So, if once you become proficient at Sudoku, switch to another challenging activity like the New York Times Crossword puzzle.

So You Think You Know How To Study?

I'll admit it. I have done this and I'm not proud of it. I think we all have committed this fatal sin while studying for school during our educational lifespan. It is an all to common study strategy that isn't very effective. What is this ineffective strategy I am talking about? It's rereading. According to cognitive psychologists Daniel Willingham on his blog title Students Should Be Taught How To Study, rereading the chapter and notes (and I would add powerpoints) from class are students number 1 study strategy. The problem is that this strategy is very effective. One of the most effective study techniques is self-testing as noted in this APA article title Study Smart. Testing (or any learning activity that promotes practice and repetition) itself is learning activity that can help promote retention and recall. The critical keys here are practice and repetition with the material. Unfortunately not all students are motivated to self-test. In fact, many students will resist this. But students who are willing to self-test will be doing themselves a huge favor.

Conference Seasons!

Hello everyone,

Conference season is here! Last week Anton, Ursula, and I(Trevor) attended Lilly West 2012 over spring break. Terry Doyle gave the keynote speech, which can be viewed here at his website. I encourage everyone to take a look.

UVU's own Scholarship of Teaching and Engagement (SOTE) today and tomorrow. If you can make it, please come down and take in a session.

Be Engaged

The Washington Post published an article on February 15^th titled, “Colleges Looking Beyond the Lecture.” Big lecture classes seem to be a thing of the past as classes evolve into more hands on learning. The focus is shifting away from what is being taught by the professor to what is being learned by the students. Not only can students attend a class at a university, but anyone can watch lectures online. Jane Greco is quoted about a goal, “to separate out what you’re getting in our classroom that you can’t get online.” There are countless ways to get the students active in the classroom rather than mindlessly sitting there listening to the professor speak the entire time.

UVU is a place of engaged learning. Looking at what that means, I looked on UVU’s website which mentions, “engaged learning implies that graduates should leave UVU with a diploma in one hand and a resume in the other… to that end, UVU’s curriculum teaches the ‘how’ and ‘why’ in conjunction with the ‘what’ and ‘who.’” Teaching in this fashion gives students the added edge to succeed in the competitive business world. Getting students involved can vary from serving the community to classroom discussions. Nothing is too big or too small in getting students to learn the real-world application. Be creative, and have fun with it. If you would like ideas, feel free to contact the faculty center or request a SCOT (student consultant).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/colleges-looking-beyond-the-lecture/2012/02/03/gIQA7iUaGR_story.html

http://www.uvu.edu/engage/learn/index.html

Democracy in the Classroom

The UVU Review had an article titled “Classroom democracy doesn’t work” in the January 23, 2012 edition of the paper (volume LII, Issue 19). This article talks about how there are some professors who leave it up to the students to decide how the class is run. This can vary from the type of tests the students take, how many assignments, whether group projects are involved, to the exact material that is discussed. The article argues that professors should not do this in lower division courses, but that it is more acceptable in upper division.

I can understand this student standpoint, mainly because I have seen negative experiences with professors not giving enough direction. However, looking at creating a learner-centered teaching style, we can find an efficient way to encourage students to be more involved with their education. The following paragraphs discuss the benefits, and ways to incorporate learner-centered teaching into the classroom.

What are the benefits of learner-centered teaching? In my English class, we are discussing stakeholders. Who are the stakeholders in a class? The answer is easy, the professor and the students. This can be taken further; UVU is a stakeholder because their reputation is on the line. The community is a stakeholder because the students are the future professionals, which also affects the economy. But let’s focus down to the professor, students, and the atmosphere that is created. Weimer, author of Learner-Centered Teaching, discusses these three areas in more detail. First, Weimer says, “If students are engaged, involved, and connected with a course, they are motivated to work harder in that course” (31). Getting students involved can be difficult, especially in an introductory course that they don’t really want to be in. The student may not see the relevance as to why they need to take the given course. Allowing them to take part in the decision-making process assists them in a positive experience. In turn, this can help them see application to the real world. It then goes on to say, “Power sharing also benefits teachers. You no longer struggle with passive, uninterested, disconnected students” (31). The students become engaged in the class. They want to be involved and connected to what is taking place. It allows them to feel important to the process and allows for them to find their voice. Think for a moment on the best and worse teaching experiences you have had. Why was it the best or worst? My guess is that it has a lot to do with the student’s participation. Teaching can’t really happen if the students are not opening themselves up. When students are involved, the whole atmosphere of the classroom changes. “There is a much stronger sense that the class belongs to everyone. When something is ineffective, students are much more willing than in the past to help [the professor] fix it” (31). This all sounds great, right? The students feel more important to the professor, which gives them a better sense of respect towards them. They also feel respected and not looked down on. And, the professor feels productive due to a more engaged environment.

Finding this balance may be difficult at first. There are many ways to share the power with students. When choosing what types of decisions are shared with students, it is important to look at what the end purpose is. Usually the end purpose is students learning certain information, or gaining certain skills. The goal would then be to give students power that, no matter what their decision is, the end goal is still met. Weimer states, “Faculty still make key decisions about learning, but they no longer make all decisions and not always without student input” (28). An example is given about being in an introductory course and not allowing the students to choose what textbook is used. The students need more experience before making such large decisions. However, the professor may have a few textbooks that all fit the criteria and may discuss the options with the students. From there, the professor and students would discuss the options openly and decide on one together.

In one of my classes, we were going to be writing an exploratory/analysis paper. We were discussing the importance of building our writing skills to be able to take it with us into our careers. The choice was then given to us to stick with the original plan or switch to a memo format. This was a great way for us to practice a form of writing that would be used in our professional lives. The end result is still the same, we are learning to think critically, and the same amount of research is still being done.

The choice is yours to find what way works best for you to get the students involved. Many more resources can be found in making the decision. Be “that” teacher. “That” teacher where the students want to be in the class, they are excited to contribute. A difference can be made.

Resources:
Boyce, John-Ross. "Classroom Democracy Doesn't Work." UVU Review 23 Jan. 2012, volume LII ed., Opinions sec. Print.

Weimer, Maryellen. "The Balance of Power." Learner-Centered Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002. 23-45. Print.

Universities vs. Police Agencies

Professor David H. Bayley, of State University of New York at Albany, wrote an interesting article comparing Universities to Police Agencies. My first thought when hearing this was humorous. “Yeah, they are a lot alike! My professors are the police, and they are telling me what to do. I am in jail!” All joking aside, I jumped into the article and found some interesting points.

Bayley starts out describing how police organizations are not any worse than many other organizations today. To illustrate, he gives examples of how a University runs. Classes are given to educate and police investigate in the manner that desired outcomes are met. However, how much is being done to ensure the steps along the way are what would be considered the best? Police, along with professors, and anyone for that matter, have a hard time being criticized for how they do things. When being looked at, police, as well as universities, “prefer to be judged by what they do rather than what they achieve.” Blame is generally placed on the student, or the citizen, when the desired outcome is not met. However, how much focus is placed on getting the proper training? Yes, there are certain requirements to becoming a professor, but where is the training for teaching. Other than personal experiences of seeing others teach while you are going to school yourself, or teaching as a graduate student, there isn’t really a period of time that someone has to be trained in teaching. With all the comparisons done, let’s not focus on the people themselves, but the system in which they work.

What can we take from this? I personally feel like professors have a lot to deal with. They need to be able to find a way that they are able to deliver their knowledge to the students. They have a lot of expertise, but maybe not the right type of training (no fault of their own) to be able to do that. This is where I can see that being engaged with the students can help. Getting proper feedback from the students can allow the professor to see weak, and even strong areas they have. This can free us all from “jail”. The Faculty Center has great tools with workshops available. Finding the time may be difficult, but the reward can be well worth it.

The reference, if you are interested in reading the article is:
Bayley, D.H. (1994). Police for the future. New York: Oxford University Press.