Search Results For "cova book"

Even though constructivist learning theorists for many decades promoted the benefits of self-directed learning or autodidactism it wasn’t until the COVID crisis of 2020 and the mass forced remote learning that most educators had realized that too many students were not suited or prepared to learn online. Why? Justin Reich (2020) points to research in his book, A Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education, which shows that the learners who are most successful in an online or blended environment that requires self-pacing and personal motivation are those who are already successful in school. These self-directed, self-motivated, and academically prepared learners will succeed in any learning environment because they know how to learn and assess the quality of their own work. The problem that we face is that the vast majority of students are dependent on their teachers to direct their learning and to administer standardized testing. If autodidactic learners are able to learn in any type of environment then we should be asking how do we help our learners become autodidacts and adopt a learner’s mindset. I have explored this notion further in the post, We Need More Autodidacts and the related Learner’s Mindset Discussion.

Our research in the Digital Learning and Leading (DLL) program at Lamar University, our experience in the School of Instructor Education at Vancouver Community college over the past several years, and several decades of related research and experience in a wide variety of learning environments have confirmed that if you create a significant learning environment where you give your learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA) you can incorporate assessment FOR/AS learning which can help shift a learner toward a learner’s mindset. We have also learned through our experience and research that incorporating feedforward or educative formative assessment will also help to continue that shift toward the learner’s mindset. By giving learners choice over most aspects of their learning experience and through the use of authentic learning opportunities and ePortfolios, our students over the past several years have incorporated many aspects of the assessment as learning perspective which are essential to the learner’s mindset.

Unfortunately, all too often there is a very different learning environment that our students experience in the courses and programs I have developed and instructed than the type of the learning environment that my students are able to create for their learners in their organizations. Finding the right balance between assessment of learning, assessment for learning, and assessment as learning is one more factor that plays a significant role in the learning environment. In much the same way that we have explored and differentiated the role of choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities we have to do the same for assessment OF/FOR/AS learning.

Rather than add to the decades of literature on assessment OF/FOR/AS learning I will draw upon the key ideas and summarize the salient points that are most important to contributing to a significant learning environment.

For those who prefer a more typical written definition the New South Wales (Australia) Education Standards Authority (2017) provide a good summary of “assessment for, as, and of learning”

Assessment of learning assists teachers in using evidence of student learning to assess achievement against outcomes and standards. Sometimes referred to as ‘summative assessment’, it usually occurs at defined key points during a teaching work or at the end of a unit, term or semester, and may be used to rank or grade students. The effectiveness of assessment of learning for grading or ranking purposes depends on the validity, reliability, and weighting placed on any one task. Its effectiveness as an opportunity for learning depends on the nature and quality of the feedback.

Assessment for learning involves teachers using evidence about students’ knowledge, understanding, and skills to inform their teaching. Sometimes referred to as ‘formative assessment’, it usually occurs throughout the teaching and learning process to clarify student learning and understanding.

Assessment as learning occurs when students are their own assessors. Students monitor their own learning, ask questions and use a range of strategies to decide what they know and can do, and how to use assessment for new learning.

The following assessment OF/FOR/AS learning table is a compilation of from a wide variety of resources that goes a bit further than simple definitions (Chappuis et al., 2012; Fenwick & Parsons, 2009; McNamee & Chen, 2005; Rowe, 2012; Schraw, 2001; Sparks, 1999):

Assessment Of Learning For Learning As Learning
Type Summative Formative Formative
What Teachers determine the progress or application of knowledge or skills against a standard. Teachers and peers check progress and learning to help learners to determine how to improve. Learner takes responsibility for their own learning and asks questions about their learning and the learning process and explores how to improve.
Who Teacher Teacher & Peers Learner & Peers
How Formal assessments used to collect evidence of student progress and may be used for achievement grading on grades. Involves formal and informal assessment activities as part of learning and to inform the planning of future learning.  Learners use formal and informal feedback and self-assessment to help understand the next steps in learning. 
When Periodic report Ongoing feedback Continual reflection
Why Ranking and reporting Improve learning Deeper learning and learning how to learn
Emphasis Scoring, grades, and competition Feedback, support, and collaboration Collaboration, reflection, and self-evaluation

If we want to encourage our learners to become more autodidactic it would then seem reasonable to shift from assessment of learning to assessment for learning and ultimately get to assessment as learning. We see this perspective from Lorna Earl (2012) in her highly cited text Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximise Student Learning.

Earl’s assessment pyramids are featured in many different sources and her argument that the traditional assessment of learning is the dominant form of assessment is widely accepted. Even though she calls for a balance in the use of assessment of/for/as learning her revised assessment pyramid that replaces assessment of learning with assessment as learning as the base of the pyramid still doesn’t represent a realistic balance nor an effective way to incorporate assessment into the learning environment.

Rather than view assessment of/for/as learning as hierarchical it may be more effective to view assessment of/for/as learning more holistically as more of an interplay of assessment within the learning environment. The National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in Ireland (2017) offers a wonderful perspective on assessment of/for/as learning that emphasizes the interplay of the different types of assessment and the key roles that the assessment and the people involved play.

While some learning theorists may desire to craft a potential learning environment that uses assessment as learning, the reality we face, and that our learners face is not theoretical. We live in a world where we use credentialing exams and other forms of standardized testing and while we have seen a recent move toward implementing formative feedback most educators’ reality reveals that assessment of learning dominates. Moving toward assessment for learning and assessment as learning will only be possible if we look at the bigger picture. We need to help educators to recognize that we are not asking for a full pendulum swing away from assessment of learning to assessment as learning with assessment for learning somewhere in the middle. We are acknowledging that an interplay of all three is not only realistic it will be the most productive approach to improving the learning environment.

We must also acknowledge that our teaching and learning environment are dramatically influenced by the assessments we use. If we consider assessment of/for/as learning as an integral part of the learning environment and we look to fully integrate assessment as part of the learning process then we do our learners justice by helping them to experience a balance in the assessment of/for/as learning. If we model an integrated approach to assessment of/for/as learning then we will be equipping our learners so that they too can integrate assessment of/for/as learning into their own learning environments that they create for their learners.

While this more focused examination of assessment of/for/as learning may provide a novel perspective for some, we have been incorporating the assessment of/for/as learning inter-relationship in the creation of our significant learning environments and when we give learners choice, ownership and voice through authentic learning. This assessment as learning perspective is a practical way to move into what the researcher Mizerow would argue is transformational learning. Mizerow (2000 & 2010) argues that you do not learn things until you tell someone about what you have learned. The transformation to deeper learning happens in the reflective process and the sharing of your learning process with others.

The entire shift toward the learner’s mindset includes the shift toward assessment as learning and you and the following posts and video are a few examples of how we have been supporting and exploring how to help learners become self-directed or autodidactic.

Related posts:

References

Alberta Education. (2003). Types of classroom Assessment http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/mewa/html/assessment/types.html

Assessment OF/FOR/AS Learning. (2017, March). [National Forum]. The National Forum for the enhancement of teaching and learning in higher education. https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/our-priorities/student-success/assessment-of-for-as-learning/

Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. (2012). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right-using it well. Pearson Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.

Earl, L. M., & Manitoba School Programs Division. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba

Education, Citizenship and Youth. https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/index.html

Fenwick, T. J., & Parsons, J. (2009). The art of evaluation: A resource for educators and trainers. Thompson Educational Publishing.

McNamee, G. D., & Chen, J.-Q. (2005). Dissolving the Line between assessment and teaching. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 72–76.

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. Jossey-Bass Publishers. San Francisco, CA.

National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. (2017, March 30). Expanding our Understanding of Assessment and Feedback in Irish Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/publication/expanding-our-understanding-of-assessment-and-feedback-in-irish-higher-education/.

NSW Education Standards Authority. (n.d.). Assessment For, As and of Learning. Retrieved December 7, 2020, from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-curriculum/assessment/approaches

Rowe, J. (2012). Assessment as learning—ETEC 510. http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Assessment_as_Learning

Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3–16). Springer.

Sparks, D. (1999). Assessment without victims: An interview with Rick Stiggins. Journal of Staff Development, 20, 54–56.

Revised Feb 21, 2021

Why Wait to Ship?

Dwayne Harapnuik —  December 14, 2020 — Leave a comment

I just finished listening to Seth Godin’s latest book Practice: Shipping Creative Work for the second time and I realized that this book was for me and about me. Godin argues that the path forward requires curiosity, generosity, and connection. He has helped me to realize that I have been on this path forward for a long time. Consider the following:

Curiosity – I have been exploring how to enhance the learning environment for over 30 years and curiosity or as I like to refer to this as inquisitivsm has been the starting point of a larger body of work:
Development and Evaluation of Inquisitivism as a Foundational Approach for Web-Based Instruction
Benefits of Life Long Authentic Learning Opportunities
Power of the Continual Practice of Authentic Learning
Do You Care Enough to Let Them Take Ownership of Their Learning?
What are you learning today?

Generosity – I have been working at changing or improving the world one learner at a time and this blog/website, my work on CSLE+COVA, the COVA eBook, and now the Learner’s Mindset are just a few examples of giving it all away with hopes of improving the world.
More examples of generosity:
Want To Change the World – Tell a Good Story
Never Been a Better Time to Be a Learner
Mapping Your Learner’s Journey
Why Authentic Learning Converts Into Lifelong Learning
Changing the world, one learner at a time

Connecting – As a constructivist the making of meaningful connections is at the heart of how I view learning. Making connections is what an autodidact does and I have been comparing the difference between Connecting the Dots Vs Collecting the Dots personally and professionally.
More connections:
We Need More Autodidacts
Why do so many prefer passive learning?
The Human Mind is a Story Processor, Not a Logic Processor
Chance Favors the Connected Mind

I have been trying to change/improve the world, one learner at a time and I see that my life’s work has been leading up to this time. I am a learning theorist and my practice involves helping people learn how to learn…this is what I do and have always done.

There is only one missing piece. I can no longer wait until I get my ideas just right, or complete that final detail that 99% of most people would miss or not even care about. As Seth Godin suggests: If it doesn’t ship it doesn’t matter. I now need to ship.

One more article pointing to one more book explaining that technology alone has not and will not transform education. In this Learner’s Mindset Discussion we look at this latest warning article from Justin Reich Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education (create a free account to view the full article) and offer some suggestions on how we can use the Learner’s Mindset to help develop more self-directed learners or autodidact.

Reich’s book with the same title Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education is a much more detailed handing of this issue. Larry Cuban has been exploring or exposing the myth that educational technology can transform the education system for decades so it is assuring to note the ideas we explored in our Learner’s Mindset Discussion are confirmed by the likes of this educational historian in his review of Riech’s argument. Cuban’s book Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom offers an earlier version of the same argument and some of Cuban’s warnings on the empty promises of technology go back to the 70’s and 80’s so this is not a new idea.

How to Develop More Autodidacts
Throughout the discussion, my colleague and I talked about some of the things we need to do to help learners become self-directed and independent learners or autodidacts. I have spent the last three decades exploring and researching this question so you will find that my site is filled with posts on learning how to learn. To save you some time on searching my site consider the following posts as a starting point:

Change in Focus
Connecting dots vs collecting dots
CSLE+COVA
In pursuit of the better way – the learners mindset
DIY Mindset Requires a Learner’s Mindset
How to Grow a Growth Mindset

Checklists, progress bars, completion status checks, competency or activity focused rubrics and other related tools or methods that help a student to check a completed activity off a list may be useful in competency-based education but these activity monitors do not have a place or role in outcome-based education. They are simply not needed in outcome-based education because the focus of the learning environment and experience is not on completing an activity, rather, the focus is on the outcome which drives the context of learning. I do have to qualify that for outcomes-based education to be truly effective the use of authentic or “real world” learning opportunities are required to create the context for the learning outcome. If the learner is working toward a real-world solution, building or creating an authentic or real-world project, or even researching, analyzing, and synthesizing a plan for a real project, the context of these authentic opportunities drives the learning and the work. Working on authentic projects requires that the learner goes much deeper than simply checking an activity off a list. The trial and error and failing forward that is part of this process does not lend itself to checklists.

In the following video, we explain the difference between competency-based education and outcome-based education. It is important to note that one isn’t necessarily better than the other. They play different roles in the educational process and are used in different contexts and for different purposes. If you are measuring skills, abilities, information transfer, or a variety of other variables through a test, quiz, or even a traditional report or basic essay then you are doing competency-based education. Unfortunately, our educational system misuses the term “outcome” to refer to goals and objects which are central to competency-based education.

As you will have surmised from the video much of our educational system or what we focus on in education is competency-based. It is easy to measure, easy to check off the list, and easy to standardize. In contrast, because real-world problems and projects can be difficult to measure and are difficult to standardize, outcome-based instruction is all too often relegated to special programs, graduate programs, or elite institutions. Outcome-based education has been advocated by the likes of Dewey, Piaget, Brunner, Papert, and many other constructivists and cognitivist learning theorists. The educational historian David Labaree argues that we use the rhetoric of Dewey when we talk about deeper learning, critical and analytical thinking but we have the reality of Thorndyke who is the founder of our behaviorist and competency-based information transfer model of education which is still used today. Because there is an underlying desire to use real-world projects and many of our institutions frame their instruction toward job readiness there is a misconception that they are engaged in outcomes-based education.

This is especially the case in the trades and most other “hands-on”, or job readiness or credentialing programs. The students are being prepared to work in an office, dental clinic, a laboratory, a clinic, the construction site, and the “real world” work for which they need to be prepared, is viewed as the outcome; hence the misconception of outcome-based education. In virtually all of these programs, the “real world” task is broken down into smaller competencies and the student is taught and tested on each of these competencies as they go through their training. Many of these disciplines have a local, regional or federal credentialing exam that the student must pass to be authorized to work in that industry. Where there are no governmental exams there are often associations or other governing bodies formed to ensure standardization who manage the testing and credentialing within the industry.

I stated earlier that competency-based education has its place and we have a system of education that has evolved to fit this need. The designing a curriculum (DACUM) approach and the use of goals and objectives are useful instructional design tools that help to guide the process of breaking down larger goals into smaller objectives which can be easily measured. Due to its prevalence, which is attributed more so to the ease of standardization and measurement than pedagogical efficacy, most students have primarily had a competency-based education experience. This is how school works for most people. The outcome-based education all too often is relegated to special projects or special programs or to higher levels of education, but it doesn’t have to be. We can incorporate many of the benefits of outcome-based education even in a predominantly competency-based education culture if we simply change our focus.

By changing our focus we can bring the benefits of outcome-based education to our learning environments. Introductory level courses, test preparation, and credentialing courses, and other standardized focused instruction can be addressed with competency-based education. Higher-level courses within a program or where preparation for real-life, not just the test is the priority, is where outcome-based education and authentic learning opportunities can be implemented. Several words of caution. Preparing students for real-life not just the test takes more work on your part as the instructor and on the student’s part. It also requires that the control of the learning shift from the instructor to the learner. Since most students have had a steady diet of competency-based education in primary and secondary school and for the most part in higher education, many will not be prepared to take control of their own learning. The research is very clear that even though they will do better active and dynamic learning and have significantly higher grades they will not like it (see Harvard Study). In the following video we explore the consequences of this shift in control over the learning.

If you create a significant learning environment that gives your learner choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA) you will enable them to go much deeper into learning and help them revitalize their learner’s mindset.

This has been a long explanation for why I don’t use checklists, progress bars, completion status checks, competency or activity focused rubrics and other related tools or methods that help a student to check a completed activity off a list. These tools play a role in competency-based education where you simply have to check a completed skill or activity off a list. Those activity monitoring tools don’t have a place in outcomes-based education because the focus isn’t the incremental skill or activity, it is the bigger project…and what they will do with that project. All the skills and activities that the learner acquires as they go along are theirs and once they own them they become part of their learning process.

My focus is outcome-based learning and my goal is to help prepare my learners for life, not just a test. I am willing to push the boundaries of cognitive dissonance and challenge my students to take control of their learning in ways which before, they may not have done.

References

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Ginsburg, H., & Opper, S. (1969). Piaget’s theology of intellectual development: An introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Labaree, D. F. (2005). Progressivism, schools, and schools of education: An American romance. Paedagogica Historica, 41(1&2), 275-288. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ748632

Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Papert, S. (1997). Why school reform is impossible (with commentary on O’Shea’s and Koschmann’s reviews of “The children’s machine”). The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(4), 417–427.

Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R.E. Ripple & V.N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget Rediscovered: A Report on the Conference of Cognitive Studies and Curriculum Development (pp. 7–20). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Whenever two terms are juxtaposed like Feedforward Vs. Feedback the natural tendency is to ask which is better, or which term or related method will give us what effects or lead to what consequences. I am going to argue that we want to move toward feedforward rather than fall back on feedback. Why? Feedforward is the formative process of providing educative (Fink, 2013) or forward-looking perspectives (Goldsmith, 2009 & Hattie, 2009) that one can use to build on or improve. Feedforward points to opportunities and provides pathways for improvement and growth. In contrast, feedback is summative because it is backward-looking at what was wrong. It doesn’t generally provide pathways to improvement. At least in the more traditional way that feedback is applied.

We are recommending a move from feedback to feedforward that will include the following :

  • Consider the receiver not just the giver of feedback
  • Equip the receiver with a growth mindset
  • Build a culture of trust
  • Adopt a “What worked & What can you do better” approach to feedforward
  • Create a significant learning environment that promotes choice, ownership & voice through authentic learning opportunities

Feedforward Vs Feedback Overview

Download and view the Feedforward Asynch.pdf

What evidence is there to support this claim and the recommended process?

We have one of two options when exploring the credibility of these or any claims. The first is to read all the related literature and conduct a detailed analysis that will inform a conclusion and related pros and cons. The second is to find someone who has done this analysis and has summarized the analysis in a tutorial, or a synthesis post like this one.

Considering the Receiver First

The Science of Receiving Feedback

Helping your Learner Adopt a Growth Mindset

Fixed VS Growth Mindset
Growth Mindset vs. Fixed Mindset

The power of believing that you can improve | Carol Dweck

The Power of belief — mindset and success | Eduardo Briceno | TEDxManhattanBeach

dweck mindset

Growing a Growth Mindset

In the post How to Grow a Growth Mindset, I point to the key factors and research that show that promoting a growth mindset like one would promote a positive mental attitude will not work and that the growth mindset requires modeling and a significant learning environment that promotes this perspective both in spirit and in structure.

You will find a very useful Fixed vs Growth Mindset graphic and a short comparison of how the Fixed Vs Growth Mindset is equivalent to the Print Vs Digital Information Age on the blog post Fixed Vs Growth Mindset = Print Vs Digital Information Age

Obviously Carol Dweck’s book Mindset: The New Psychology of Success is definitely worth the read and should be one of those books that all educators have on their bookshelf or in their Kindle or Audible library.

Learner’s Mindset
Learner’s Mindset – a state of being where people act on their intrinsic capacity to learn and respond to their inquisitive nature that leads to viewing all interactions with the world as learning opportunities. This state enables one to interact with and influence the learning environment as a perpetual learner who has the capacity to use change and challenges as opportunities for growth.

To fully explore the Learner’s Mindset and see how it is different than the growth mindset or the Innovator’s Mindset consider the following:

Learner’s Mindset Explained
Reignite Your Learner’s Mindset

Going Deeper…

Growth Mindset | Never vs Not Yet
Feedforward: Coaching For Behavioral Change
How to Give Feedback to Students
Feedback & Feedforward
Why CSLE+COVA
CSLE+COVA Research

References

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Penguin Random House.

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. Jossey-Bass.

Goldsmith, M. (2009). Take It to the next level: What got you here, won’t get you there. Simon & Schuster Audio/Nightingale-Conant.

Goldsmith, M. (2003). Try feedforward instead of feedback. Journal for Quality and Participation, 38–40.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(81), 81–112.

Hirsch, J. (2017). The feedback fix: Dump the past, embrace the future, and lead the way to change. Rowman & Littlefield.

Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2015). Thanks for the feedback: The science and art of receiving feedback well (even when it is off base, unfair, poorly delivered, and frankly, you’re not in the mood) (Vol. 36). Penguin.