Search results

Each of the four objectives can be applied within the military training environment. Military training often requires that soldiers achieve specific levels of performance or proficiency in each phase of training. For example, training courses impose entrance and graduation criteria, and awards are given for excellence in military performance. Frequently, training devices, training media, and training evaluators or observers also directly support the need to diagnose performance strengths and weaknesses. Training measures may be used as indices of performance, and to indicate the need for additional or remedial training.

‘I like the fact that it's simple; I like the fact that it's not too complicated, and I think that whoever developed it, developed it with the people in mind’. Blended learning master's student talking about Solent Online Learning.The authors carried out an extended project aimed at making effective use of the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) for the delivery of high-quality online distance and blended learning. This was in response to a greater demand for such courses through the emergence of a new constituency of learner, principally professional learners, those already in employment but seeking to improve their level of qualification and employability through the study of flexibly delivered credit bearing courses. The growth of this constituency can be seen very much as a response to the changes to the funding structure in the higher education sector in the UK. To this end, the authors worked within a team that developed an approach to effective course design, the Solent Online Learning Standard, and then a new methodology for collaborating with academic staff in the development and delivery of such courses. In order to best facilitate this, the team also created a new instance of its institutional VLE, called Solent Online Learning and tailored more to the needs of these new professional learners.

L. Dee Fink proposes that different and more significant kinds of learning should be created in higher education to transition student outcomes from simply “learning” to “significant learning,” and these new types of learning should be situated within significant learning experiences (Fink, 2003). Fink also identified a taxonomy of significant learning that included six components: integration, foundational knowledge, application, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. Using Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning as a framework, the authors will share the development of a course on navigating the US Healthcare System that resulted in significant learning outcomes for students completing the first semester of a four-year Doctor of Pharmacy curriculum. Each learning experience will link to a component of the taxonomy and will serve as the mechanism for the authors to share the development and implementation associated with each aspect of the semester-long course. The assessment structure of the course is described in detail. The authors present one or more learning experiences to illustrate each component of Fink’s Taxonomy. Finally, lessons learned from the development and implementation of the course are presented to guide programs considering implementation of a similar significant learning experience.

Using a case study analysis of one undergraduate program that focuses on training science majors to perform sustainability outreach in their communities, this study offers pedagogical suggestions for how educators in universities might incorporate sustainability and activism into their curricular design.

This chapter discusses the relationship between the hard academic knowledge of the classroom and the outreach work done by the students by examining how curricular design and classroom activities lead to outreach work. Drawing on interviews, curriculum materials, and observations of staff meetings, this chapter examines how the course teachers use a peer-learning model to collaboratively develop the pedagogy of the classroom.

This model of teacher training through engagement with the content material of the course represents reflective learning practices. By being asked to break down and contextualize class themes and units for themselves as thinkers, the teachers first reflect on their own learning process and disciplinary participation as a way of developing course material for their students, who are themselves not incredibly far behind their facilitators in their own learning development.

The effectiveness of this practice suggests possibilities for using teacher training as a way to model the classroom space that each discipline believes best serve their learning goals. By first reflecting on their own individual relationship to the subject material, the teachers engage in a re-negotiation with knowledge that is synonymous with effective learning. The knowledge of the discipline is constantly re-negotiated around why that knowledge matters for each individual member of the discipline.

By considering how the classroom in this program combines disciplinary knowledge of environmental science with outreach and activist-oriented praxis, this case study analysis allows for pedagogical techniques that instructors might use with similar goals of combining traditional academic discourse with public outreach and participation.

Supplemental Instructions (SIs) were introduced into the San Francisco State University College of Science & Engineering curriculum in 1999. The goal was to improve student performance and retention and to decrease the time to degree in STEM majors. While for the most part we followed the structure and activities as developed by the International Center for Supplemental Instruction at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, we discovered several variations that significantly improved our outcomes. First and foremost, we created SI courses that require attendance, which results in higher students’ performance outcomes compared to drop-in options. Second, at SFSU the SI courses are led by pairs of undergraduate student facilitators (who are all STEM majors) trained in active learning strategies. Each year, more than half of our facilitators return to teach for another year. Thus, each section has a returning “experienced” facilitator who works with a new “novice” facilitator. Third, the SI courses were created with a distinct course prefix and listed as courses that generate revenue and make data access available for comparison studies. Results are presented that compare SI impact by gender and with groups underrepresented in STEM disciplines.

This chapter explores the value of a service-learning unit within a pre-service secondary teaching course. It does so through the perceptions of pre-service teachers. The purpose was to determine the potential of a service-learning program to prepare pre-service secondary teachers for the classroom, both personally and professionally. The context for the research is a social justice service-learning unit offered to pre-service secondary teachers undertaking a Bachelor of Education, Master of Teaching or Graduate Diploma of Education. There were 105 participants in the study. Data collection entailed a 25- to 30-minute survey, which participants completed at the conclusion of the unit. The survey contained qualitative and quantitative questions. Data were analysed through content analysis in the case of the open-ended questions while percentages and frequency column graphs were used for the multiple response questions. The results revealed that the personal and professional development of pre-service secondary teachers had been impacted significantly as a result of engagement in service-learning activities. Additionally, participants listed a range of ‘memorable’ experiences, highlighted various challenges associated with service-learning, indicated ways service-learning prepared them for their teaching practicum, and noted the importance of including service-learning as part of a teaching degree. An over-arching theme that emerged repeatedly in the comments of the pre-service teachers was the need to adopt an inclusive attitude in their teaching practice. The chapter concludes with the authors offering recommendations that focus on further research into the viability of service-learning programs in pre-service teaching courses.

This chapter explores the ways in which academic educators’ experience of collaborative inquiry-based learning (IBL) can illuminate student behaviours, particularly in relation to assessment and the affective domain. The facilitator of this IBL, in the setting of academic staff development in UK Higher Education, uses a reflective storytelling style to detail the learning of an annual cohort of staff at a university in the north west of the United Kingdom. Six separate academic staff cohorts enroled in a unit, as part of a Master of Arts in Academic Practice, to undertake this experiential, humanist way of learning, working with all the principles of collaborative inquiry. The chapter explores the ways in which the participants’ self-reported affective responses altered over the course of the unit, particularly in relation to the assessment. Participant reflections are integrated with pedagogic literature and extracts from the facilitator’s contemporaneous notes, assessor’s feedback and other material, detailing the ways in which the freedom of an IBL episode moves to anxiety associated with assessment, which can build as the assessment point nears. Reflections on group constitution, cohort characteristics and the role of the facilitator are considered in relation to the notion of ‘success’ of IBL episodes. This is interrogated particularly in relation to academic staff responses to the experience of the emotions of IBL, and how this may affect their own practice in designing teaching and learning experiences for students in Higher Education.

A current vision of education in America today is that all students be science literate. To accomplish this, educators and teachers need to be aware of the challenges involved in promoting science literacy: science literacy encompasses a wide range of knowledge, including construction of knowledge, use of that knowledge, and recall of critical facts necessary to apply scientific information in the world today. In addition, teachers and educators need a knowledge of the issues of “inclusion” since students of diverse abilities, including those with disabilities and others at risk for school failure, are being educated, as much as possible, in general education classrooms taught by content experts.

A bridge to span the gap between the challenges of science literacy for all students and the complexities of student diversity is Content Enhancement – instruction that responds to the needs of students of diverse abilities while maintaining content integrity by focusing on the critical information that all students need to know. In Content Enhancement, the teacher helps students learn by organizing information, providing explicit instruction when necessary, and assuring that students are active partners with the teacher and other students in the construction of knowledge. Graphic organizers and instructional sequences have been developed to help teachers organize information at the course, unit and lesson levels; learn to answer large, difficult questions with ideas that can be generalized to other settings; explore and manipulate knowledge by developing analogies and comparisons; and respond to assessments.

The work of academics has intensified, but the focus for most remains on teaching, research and contribution to service. Institutional imperatives and positioning within universities impact significantly on how individual academics fashion themselves to fit with expectations and demands. There is, of course, no simple version of scholarly identity and Barnett (2000) called attention to the ‘super complexity’ of academic work some time ago. ‘Scholarly’ has been deliberately used in the title of this chapter, even though ‘academic’ is also used throughout. The purpose here is to draw attention to – and avoid – the binary that Stuart Hall notes: Academic work is inherently conservative in as much as it seeks, first, to fulfill the relatively narrow and policed goals and interests of a given discipline or profession and, second, to fulfill the increasingly corporatized mission of higher education; intellectual work, in contrast is relentlessly critical, self-critical, and potentially revolutionary for it aims to critique, change, and even destroy institutions, disciplines and professions that rationalize exploitation, inequality and injustice. (reported in Olsen & Worsham, 2003, p. 13)