Collaborative learning and teaching

What is the role of collaboration in understanding?  And if it helps increase understandings and knowledge then what is the responsibility, and how do we build in collaboration in learning particularly in virtual environments?  And if it helps in learning, how can it help in teaching? 

While a social constructionist perspective definitely sees understanding as coming from a shared social space, most of us probably have anecdotal support for the role of collaboration in understanding, whether it be through the exposure to different perspectives from one's own or the requirement to articulate a view to others; this is also often a iterative process, allowing all parties to come to new understandings. An obvious example of this would be this blogging assignment: not only do I understand the concept better as I explain myself, but I also benefit from reading and commenting on my group's blogs as well as their comments on this one.

If we see learning as coming to a new understanding, then learning could certainly be assisted via collaboration. In an online learning environment, this collaboration is often not as easy to come by in a f2f class, especially a f2f class that has a student participation component, as they often do. As a result, it becomes even more important for an online teacher to build in collaboration in order to expose students to more views and facilitate social reflection.

Often overlooked is the importance of collaboration in teaching. As an adjunct who goes from school to school and often does not see other English instructors unless I go out of my way to seek them, I have a distinct understanding of how lack of collaboration hurts teaching. I have often had the feeling of trying to reinvent the wheel, knowing that someone has probably figured out a better approach or what to do in a situation. From the perspective of a librarian in a school setting, teaching goals are similar if not exactly aligned with the instructor's, so collaboration makes perfect sense. (For instance, how many college classes have essays that require source use? That's information literacy.) Additionally, what a librarian teaches will "stick" better if the student can tie it directly to other course work (i.e., transfer) and collaboration helps ensure this.

Online v. F2F

In what ways is online learning qualitatively different than face to face learning?

Certainly the largest difference between the two is that in online learning all interaction is mediated through a computer instead of "face to face." Because of this, interaction online is often asynchronous. Thus, online learning poses more challenges in facilliatating interaction between students and teachers and students and other students. Online learning becomes a more individual activity as students need to find the time for a class that is often spread over the week instead of meeting at designated times. Feedback is easily delayed in online classes. However, for a student who prefers to think before speaking, online classes can better suit communication style, with their use of discussion boards and email messaging versus the F2F classroom discussion. Also, this format can facillitate questions from students to instructors, especially from students who are shy; however, some students would be less likely to ask questions in this form. Verbal feedback is easier in F2F classes and it can be easier to avoid misunderstandings - however, this is certainly not guarenteed. At any rate, confusions or misunderstandings take longer to resolve online. In all, online learning takes more effort to create social learning; however, because of this, the social learning that does happen is probably more focused.

Assessment and Learning

What is the role of assessment in learning?  Is assessment a tool for the teacher or student? How can assessment be both?

Assessment is probably more commonly seen as a tool for teachers to gauge how much or how well students are learning, and in it's formal form, as a graded test of some sort. However, unfortunately these sorts of assessments, at least partially, often gauge how well students are at taking assessments, or they test the memorization skills of a student. I think most "good" students (as determined by gpa) have had the experience of excelling on a test only to forget what was "learned" soon after. In Understanding by Design, Wiggins and McTighe point out that often this sort of assessment is done because it is the easiest for teachers to evaluate or grade; and this is not only in terms of time (and how jealous am I of the instructors who can use the scantron machine? Very), but also because of the built in objectivity in evaluating these assessments (and hence justifiability in grade assignment). However, if well thought out, Wiggins and McTighe show how assessment can be a more reliable predictor of learning.

Less considered is how informal assessment can also be a tool for an instructor. This could be informal surveys of students, feedback gotten during discussions, small writing assignments...as more focused and less high pressure than formal assessments, these have the potential to be a very specific tool for teachers to see where students are and then be able to tailor future content accordingly. Also, students assessment can also help teachers assess their own teaching approaches.

Perhaps the least concentrated on is how assessment is also (or at least should be) a tool for students. Quizzes that lead to a larger exam, small writing assignments that build up to a long research paper, a short survey on what the most important thing learned in today's class and asking the student for one question that remains, a pretest  - all of these can be tools for students to gauge their own progress, to see their strengths and weaknesses and help them determine how far they've come and what they need to work on. These assessments can also reinforce learning and especially transfer by asking students to reflect.

One problem, I think, is that students don't see assessment as a tool for them; too often assessment seems more a hoop to jump through, with a good grade as the prize. Also, as Wiggins and McTighe rightfully point out, students are often unwilling to work harder than they "have" to. The key seems to be developing assessments that either "force" students to see learning as a tool for them, too (perhaps by having a sequence of assessments that build upon each other or making reflection part of the grade), or assessments that are super engaging to students, hence triggering their internal motivation. The most effective assessments would do both of these, although the former is certainly easier to do on a predictable basis. (Making engaging assessments is even more challenging than creating engaging learning activities, and in either case what seems like it would be engaging can easily not be for a number of reasons.)

As an instructor, I need to work on my use of informal assessment, especially those that increase student reflection. I've known this for a while, so why isn't it a bigger part of my course? I suppose in a way I fall prey to what Understanding by Design calls coverage, although not quite as bad as a course that has to cover certain topics or years of history. However, once I plan in enough writing assignments to both practice the skills in the students learning outcomes (a bit of background design now built in to colleges who want to keep their accreditation) and complete "6,000 words of graded writing" (the course description for the transfer-level comp class) I feel pretty overwhelmed in terms of what needs to be done during class time and what I can do in terms of prep and extra review in the time I am not spent grading or at least commenting on 50-100 essays every week. I do incorporate informal reflection some, though - having students reflect on each paper they submit, for example - and while I find it helpful, I am frankly not sure it is a tool for them, as well. It can serve to show me what we need to work on more or what activity I should do differently the next time I teach the class. (I have mixed feelings about this latter role - while teaching is widely seen as something you are continuously working on, I hate the feeling of "practicing" on any given class. Sometimes I avoid asking for student feedback when I already know it didn't go great just because I hate being reminded that I have failed a particular class. That is not exactly a hallmark of good teaching.)

Learning Theories Infographic via Prezi

My first attempt at either an infographic or Prezi software (which is pretty neat, but time-consuming!).

What does it mean to learn?

In a previous post I looked at how knowing differs from understanding. Knowing was more formal, surface-level, factual, whereas understanding was seen as deeper, more about application to new situations and insight; what Understanding by Design points to as the ability to transfer. Likewise, learning seems to have degrees (a comment to which my husband responded - yes, associate's degree, bachelor's degree...ha).

On the one hand, learning is clearly separate from mere memorization (although ironically this is what much assessment, especially at the lower educational levels - undergraduate college included - tests; my subject, college reading and composition doesn't really accommodate this, as much as I'd love to let the scantron machine be my grading assistant). However, learning does have a memory component. I can, for instance, say I learned Spanish verb tenses even though I don't really remember them, besides a touch of present tense conjugation, because I don't converse in Spanish.

This brings another component of learning, which is reinforcement. More reinforcement though repeated application deepens the learning in the memory as well as increasing understanding. Increased understanding gives one a bigger picture view (of the concepts, the pattern involved - could we call understanding the forest whereas knowledge is the trees?). This bigger picture, conceptual view seems to "stick" deeper in the mind. (This jives with what I know about the brain - the more connections made between things, the more structurally permanent they become.)

So perhaps instead of degrees there is depth of learning. If I carefully read and "learn" a book, long after the names and details fade, the major concepts (and the connections I made to my own life) will stay with me.

Learning Reflection Comments and Thoughts

I had the following comments from Mary Ann Harlan regarding my learning reflection that got me thinking: 

...one idea I am sure you have explored but isn’t terribly obvious in your reflection is writing as a thinking tool.  Some questions – is it the physicality of the act, a focusing tool, a strategy for memory – and in terms of the skill of note taking, how did that develop, how did you learn to identify important details in a lecture for example.  I am finding that strategy is relatively unexamined, and I am wondering if people take the skill for granted.  

The first comment got at something I had discussed with my husband (another teacher) and had even started to query in my reflection before deciding to edit it out - how does writing help me think? There is certainly the memory component, especially when it involves the physical act of writing (I haven't yet decided if typing does the same). Interestingly, for my freshman composition class I assign Adler's How to Mark a Book as the first reading where he argues that writing is an essential active reading strategy, and one of his reasons is writing's link to memory. (Students confirm this when I ask them whether they have done something like writing a shopping list and then leaving it at home, only to realize they remember their items nonetheless.)

I wondered aloud to my husband if writing wasn't also about doing, making it a physical learning method. He thought not, but it still seems logical to me. And certainly writing is about focusing attention, thoughts, energy. This is often overlooked. As an example, I normally do not write about my teaching thoughts. Usually it's more along the lines of worrying and maybe talking it out with my husband or, if I'm lucky, another English instructor (unfortunately the schedule of an adjunct often precludes seeing other teachers regularly). However, I have already felt the benefit from this focused reflecting - articulating it makes it more concrete and hence more resolvable and less anxious.

When it comes to note taking, writing can serve all of these functions - however, for me it more strongly acts as a memory agent.  Yet where, when, and how did I learn to take notes? I have to admit I am not sure - and I have tried to consider how I learned what is important to notice because I would like to use that insight to help my students be better at this. But I have no memory of conscious awareness of the method developing in me. I suspect it is a combination of osmosis (lots of reading throughout childhood) and modeling what instructors and, later, criticism articles do. So I try to model my thinking to students when we go over readings. But probably not as much as I could - this is a good reminder to do this more and more explicitly. 

Knowing and Understanding

Knowing and understanding are often seen as synonymous terms: Merriam Webster even defines knowing as having a (practical) understanding of something. However, from the perspective of learning (either as a student or a teacher), one can see these as two different concepts. Thus framed, knowing is about ability to recite and recognize facts, concepts, and processes whereas understanding becomes something more vague, less measurable - the ability to apply that knowledge to other, new situations. Understanding implies a depth that knowledge does not. You can certainly know without understanding (as we do with much of the world, be it technological or natural), but one could understand without knowing (I'm thinking of those who possess easy and quick insight into the workings of things without any education about them).

For an example of how one can know but not really understand, take what I learned about in my database management class: I know the basic components of a relational database, but without having worked with one, I really wouldn't say I understand relational databases. That said, my instructor did the best he could do to get us close to understanding, by having us define and explain in our own, conversational words and apply the concepts to imaginary situations. Both helped bring me a little into the realm of understanding. There's nothing like having to explain something to someone else that makes you really know it - and if you do a good job of explaining it (and hence applying your knowing of it to a new situation), that seems a decent indication that you're at least somewhat understanding it.

Because knowledge and understanding are abstract concepts, and because there is arguably a certain amount of overlap between the two, a firm definition is difficult to pin down. However, they are about the best terms to apply to the various hues of gray that mark our comprehension (argh, another one!) of the world.