I agree with most everyone about evaluating students on their learning, it should be a critical step in the holistic process. But how do you find the middle ground of time and money management. To implement some of these ideas would take a class size from 30 students, down to maybe 12-15 to be effective. Time is money, resources cost money, and students have enough trouble just getting loans to be in school. How do we impliment, yet remain cost effective?
I'm an engine builder turned into an instructor to teach engine building. The process is very cirtical to the outcome of building an engine and you cannot deviate from it. Therefore the students should not be infulenced by outside sources and other distraction other than what I'm trying to teach them. From what I can understand from this section, I feel it does not apply to the process of the cousres I instruct.
Yes, Don, intentional and meaningful intervention by the instructor is critical in the learning process. How do you think instructors can maintain effectiveness without diminishing learner autonomy?
It is important to evaluate the learning as a student progresses because a student maybe using the wrong method for performing a task and will continue to do it wrong until someone (instructor) shows them their error. Certain tasks require a particular proceedure that can be easily done incorrectly, without the learning realizing the mistake because their knowledge of what the proper outcome could be limited.
Excellent, Chris! Yes, it's amazing what teachers can learn about their students by meeting them on equal "human" ground and simply listening to what they have to say. I like your idea of "team" as, again, this is so important for students to learn in preparation for future professional success.
Watching the students and learning attitudes is the biggest way to check yourself. I think listening and watching are the biggest skills many teachers forget exist, and they are basic instincts. Perhaps it's because when they were students they were not listened to and watched.
Talking with (note I said with, not "at" ) the students is another great check. I like standing with them at break occasionally, it is a great measure. If they include me in conversation, I do not have a barrier - I am a member of the team. If they do not continue conversation when I am standing near by, the wall is starting to go up.
Many teachers seem to hide in the office at break times and lunch times all the time. Not so good for communication and team building. I understand not too close, but I don't want the wall up.
-Chris
Yes, Chris...actually commitment to the learning process ends up sometimes being the biggest challenge for teachers. It often appears necessary to intervene and while that may be necessary at some points, not always. The process of learning must continue and be supported by the teachers...not interrupted. Can you think of ways you could provide checks and balances for yourself in negotiating this challenge?
Much more self paced, me standing in the background more allow students to be challenged. I am more a learning manager than a lecturer. It took me a long time and lots of schooling to get it through my thick skull. I can't do it for them or it becomes memorization. It is very difficult at times not to jump in and do it for them.
I was soooo proud of my guys in a practical exam last night! They all get it!
-Chris
Yes, I agree Chris. So what kinds of changes does this approach make to how your course is constructed and delivered to your students?
From a career training perspective I want students to learn the core material for whatever subject I am teaching, however I want them to learn critical thinking skills (I think is more important). This requires me to evaluate the process of learning, I want the students to lead this process as well.
-Chris
That is true, Tracy, although sometimes the outcomes may not be well supported or mediated in a course...therefore, they would need to be revisted as well.
Good points, Francis. Particularly note that inputs and outputs can be either static or dynamic in the sense that they can either be predetermined (by the teacher or instructional design) or emergent from the learning process (the ideal).
Looking at Jack's response I think the inputs--process--outputs is a better explanation. This way we can vary the student inputs based on the students research/knowledge/interaction with outher students to process (formaulate the response based on the task at hand) and finally the output is the students work product.
Especially at the graduate level were the output will not have one correct answer but is a matter of how the student explaind ther research and the conclusions they drew.
Evaluating the process helps to deliver on the outcomes. I have often struggled with a number of students who were not meeting the outcome, whether it's a specific grade, or grasping of key knowledge, etc. Outcomes or expectations don't necessarily need to be changed. If outcomes are not being met, then somewhere in the process needs to be improved.
Excellent points, Thomas. Indeed the process of teaching and learning is dynamic and as such does not end with the immediate confines of whatever course we happen to be teaching. It is more important that students learn how to learn and how to continue to learn - new technology does add even more pressure with constant changes and developments.
Outcomes are transitory; the process endures. Since new knowledge and new technology is being generated at a very, very fast pace; whatever the outcomes of our training programs, our students will need to adjust to the demand for capabilities, skills and knowledge. Yes, I (and the company) hope that when I teach a student to maintain that tool, e.g., an induction furnace, I am very interested that they can diagnose and correct problems. However, next year that furnace will have a new component or be replaced with a newer model. If I have aided the student in learning the process of diagnosing and correcting problems with equipment in general, they will be able to work with the new system faster...ideally, training themselves in how this new system is different and how that affects their maintenance processes.
Yes, Bryan, and if this approach you describe is applied in any subject area, more students would feel empowered and not feel excluded from a subject area. For example, so many of us grew up feeling we "could't do math" rather than we couldn't find the right answer. The process in getting there required strengthening rather than so much focus on the end result.
Thank you, Theresa. The problem with evaluating the process is that it takes longer and requires more detailed attention from the instructor. In larger size classes, this can be a problem, so instructors should set up systems of evaluation that do not totally depend on them. That is, various forms of evaluation along the way, so that the process can be truly evaluated and not just from the perspective of "the right answer". Great discussion!
Good points, Donald. I agree that the learning outcomes must drive the process...I think, however, looking at the skills that students develop while using new technology and the potential skills that could be developed, we may have to rethink and redirect some of the learning outcomes to be more holistic in concept.
Being a QA/QC Manager myself for a company, it's my job to develop a quality management system that promotes continuous improvement. The basis of this is a simple, fundamental four-step process called "Plan-Do-Check-Act" developed by quality guru, W.E. Deming. For any given process used in developing a product, 1) the process is planned, then 2) the process is done, then 3) the process is checked, then 4) action is taken to correct it.
In terms of the learning process, the steps are very similar...the process is planned, then performed, then it should be evaluated, then acted upon to improve upon it, then the cycle perpetuates. The outcomes should be used as a tool to evaluate how to do it better the next time. I do this with my online courses already.
