Conference time: -
REAP Conference Fora (in programme order)
Forums > In-class vs out-of-class work Session > Bali & Keaney Case study
Subject: Opening fac comments

You are not authorized to post a reply.   
Author Messages  
Steve Draper
Posts: 25
25/05/2007 15:26  
The first feature of the Bali & Keaney study I want to discuss is student engagement. This is the clearest conclusion that we can draw: that students did engage, and wanted to engage. It thus relates to the Gibbs principle of "Capture sufficient study time and effort (in and out of class)" (http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/rap/gibbs.html). Since this took place in a class they would attend anyway, it is not inherently a clear gain for the amount of student "time on task". However if it were to become a regular feature, then it might elicit extra or more focussed preparation time.

A sign supporting this interpretation is that the students themselves demanded feedback on what the right answers were. Supplying this means that each question supplies the "metacognitive" information to each student on whether they need to work more on that topic, or seem to understand it adequately. In this respect it has some similarities to the Gardner-Medwin technique of confidence-based marking, which provokes individuals to pay attention not to guessing answers as well as they can, but to whether they understand each topic well enough to feel confidence in their answers. Metacognition has often been shown to lead to raised learning outcomes.

The most distinctive feature of the Bali & Keaney study however is the particular mix of solo and group work it designs in. One aspect, obviously, is using familiar team competition both to motivate individual performance (I musn't let my team down) and to foster group mutual supportiveness. By requiring individual answers first, they ensure everyone thinks about the question themselves rather than waiting for someone else: a crucial advantage of such EVS use over asking oral questions in class where most students wait to see what others will say. However it is not clear that the 60 seconds conferring before the second vote really supports learning as well as, say, the Mazur method for EVS use. If you want your team to win, you will listen for the most confident suggestion, but will not have time to ask for reasons or correct your understanding. It may be more like organised plagiarism than conceptual development. Most groups outside education are organised around specialisation: each member primarily does their job, and does not try to learn others' jobs but simply coordinates their actions with others. In learning, in contrast, a different kind of cooperation is required, that will eventually leave every member equally knowledgable. This classroom setup may not be designed to achieve this, and the data on their second votes does not necessarily, or even probably, reflect their knowledge still less their understanding (ability to justify their vote).
You are not authorized to post a reply.  
Forums > In-class vs out-of-class work Session > Bali & Keaney Case study > Opening fac comments


ActiveForums 3.6