According to Dempsey & Sales (1993), the motivational approach to feedback is based on the belief that “…letting people know how well they are performing a task acts as an incentive for greater effort in the future” (p. 4). Creemers (1996) cited the use of feedback and corrective instruction as one of the instructor behaviors that contribute to better student outcomes.

Learners tend to fall on a goal continuum that ranges from ego-involved (performance orientation) to task-involved (learning orientation). If they are ego-involved, they have strong incentives to demonstrate and display their abilities. If learners are task-involved, they possess strong incentives to learn, gain skills, and improve mastery. If a learner receives no cues or feedback to select or favor one goal orientation over another, they act according to their predispositions (Dempsey & Sales, 1993; Hattie and Timperley, 2007).

Typically, instructor feedback has been viewed as a useful technique to assist learners. For example, learner thought patterns and/or actions can be redirected and areas of strength or weakness can be communicated. According to Hoska (1993), it is possible to provide feedback to learners that can influence their goal orientations and maximize their incentive to perform. Approaches that have been successful include: modifying the learner’s view of intelligence, altering the goal structure of the learning task, and controlling the delivery of learning rewards. Hoska (1993) also believes feedback should help learners understand that abilities are skills that can be developed through practice, effort is key to increasing one’s skills, and mistakes are not failures; rather they are part of the skill-development process.

In order to provide effective feedback, the facilitator needs to reflect upon his/her approach to the teaching-learning process. For example, does the instructor view learning from a constructivist perspective or approach it in a more traditionalist fashion? If constructivist teaching practices are used, the emphasis is on helping learners internalize and reshape, or transform new information. This transformation occurs through the creation of new understandings (Jackson, 1986; Gardner, 1991). New cognitive structures can emerge from these understandings. In contrast, the traditional approach has been deemed to be more of a process where the learning process involves repeating or miming new material or information (Jackson, 1986). These two different approaches to learning will determine the instructional strategies used by the instructor, and in turn will impact the level of learner motivation. Feedback can also be organized around different types of interaction: learner-to-learner, learner-to-instructor, learner-to-content, and learner-to-interface (Hillman, Willis, & Gunawardena, 1994).

White and Weight (2000) discuss the issue of the online student who needs extra motivation, and propose various strategies that the instructor/facilitator can use to provide this motivation. These range from sending a direct note to the student to asking all students to relate their learning to their current work experience. The authors also stress the importance of the sensitive nature of these actions. In addition, they believe “Feedback that is timely is far more motivational and beneficial to performance improvement than delayed feedback. Thus, online feedback is best when it is prompt” (p. 63).

Formative feedback potentially “modifies a student’s thinking or behavior for the purpose of learning, and summative feedback assesses how well a student accomplishes a task or achieves a result for the purpose of grading” (White & Weight, 2000, p. 168). Since formative feedback influences thought and behavior, it is more motivational. During this process students are asked to continue doing what they have been doing, ask questions, participate, stay on topic, and/or modify their thinking or approach (when and if necessary). White & Weight (2000) also stress that feedback should be multidimensional, non-evaluative, supportive, student controlled, consistent, constructive, objective, timely, and specific. They cite some of the best practices used by online instructors for providing constructive formative and summative feedback:

• Focus on specific behavior rather than on the online student
• Take the needs of the online student into account
• Direct feedback toward behavior the online student can change
• Help online students to “own” the feedback
• Give timely online feedback
• Check online feedback for clarity
• Consider online feedback as part of an ongoing relationship (White & Weight, 2000, p. 173-4).

As we strive to provide constructive and substantive formative and summative feedback, it is essential to understand its impact on learner motivation. This knowledge will allow us to utilize more effective instructional practices and provide more meaningful learning experiences, while also improving our course design.

References

Creemers, B. (1996). The school effectiveness knowledge base. In D. Reynolds (Ed). Making good schools. London: Routledge.

Dempsey, J.V. & Sales, G.C. (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.

Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research. 77(1). 81-112. London: Sage Publications. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487

Hillman, D. C. A., Willis, D .J.  & C.N. Gunawardena (1994). Learner-Interface Interaction in Distance Education: An Extension of Contemporary Models and Strategies for Practitioners. The American Journal of Distance Education. 8(2), 30-42.

Hoska, D.M. (1993). Motivating learners through CBI feedback: Developing a positive learner perspective. In Dempsey, J.V. & Sales, G.C. (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (pp. 105-132). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Jackson, P.W. (1986). The practice of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.

Sales, G.C. & Johnston, M.D. (1988). Graphic fidelity, gender, and performance in computer-based simulations. (Research Bulletin #1, Improving the Use of Technology in Schools: What We Are Learning). Minneapolis, MN: MECC/UM Center for the Study of Educational Technology.

White, K. W. & Weight, B. H. (2000). The online teaching guide: A handbook of attitudes, strategies and techniques for the virtual classroom. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

It’s high summer and I’m thinking about the course I’ll be teaching this fall. Maybe it’s just the time of the year where my own attention wanders, but I’m spending more time than usual thinking about student motivation. What is the secret to getting students engaged with the course material so that they are as excited as I am?

Researchers on learning theory have a lot to say about student motivation. How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching devotes an entire chapter to the factors that motivate students to learn.

Some of the strategies that motivate students to learn identified by HLW echo what you probably hear from your own students: connect the material to the their interests, provide authentic real-world tasks, and demonstrate a relevance to students’ future professional lives. After all, as much as we wish we had unlimited time to spend pursing knowledge just for the sheer pleasure of learning something new, we know our students don’t usually have that kind of time as undergrads.

Another category of strategies deal with helping students stay motivated by making sure the course is well organized so everyone knows what the expectations are.  Making sure objectives, assessment methods and instructional strategies are in alignment so students know exactly what’s expected of them. Pegging your course so that it is challenging enough but your expectations of what students can do at a particular level is realistic. Perhaps the most interesting strategy is “providing early success opportunities” which the authors suggest is especially important in “high risk or gateway” courses that students stress about. The idea is that by providing less challenging assignments that students are likely to succeed at early on in the semester, you will motivate students by building their confidence before they encounter more difficult work.

If you are teaching online or flipped courses, you may need to build in some additional structure to encourage student motivation.  We’ll address that in a post later this month.

What techniques work to motivate your students? We’d love to see your comments below.

How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. Susan A. Ambrose, Michael W. Bridges, Michele DiPietro, Marsha C. Lovett, Marie K. Norman, and Richard E. Mayer

by Katie Beres, Instructional Liaison, CTTL

Dr. Patti Clayton facilitated a workshop for the SLU community on May 7 on the topic of critical reflection. As a follow up to her workshop this article provides a summary of various metacognitive activities (including Clayton’s DEAL model) to support student learning.

What are metacognitive activities?

Metacognitive activities engage students to reflect on their thought processes: their learning, understanding, etc. The extent of the activity may range from a prompts framing the introduction and conclusion of a lecture or a stand-alone assessment activity.

Students who are more aware of how they engage with their learning experience are more committed to learning and can identify patterns in their behavior that either help or hinder their learning process. The ability to articulate their learning strategies, in turn, helps to refine and improve their behaviors to become more effective. Teaching metacognition is also an opportunity to explicitly discuss the philosophy behind decision-making in your discipline. Examples of types of metacognitive activities, models, and corresponding tools to facilitate them include:

For further reading (and listening):

• Ash, S. L. & Clayton, P. H. (2009). Generating, Deepening, and Documenting Learning: The Power of Critical Reflection in Applied Learning. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), 25-48.
• Jaschik, S. (2011, Jan 31). Colleges Try to Use Metacognition to Improve Student Learning. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/31/colleges_try_to_use_metacognition_to_improve_student_learning
• Lovett, M. (2008). Teaching metacognition [Presentation recording]. Retrieved from ELI Annual Meeting 2008 Resources  http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-annual-meeting/2008/teaching-metacognition
• The role of metacognition in teaching geoscience (n.d.) http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/metacognition/index.html
• Weimer, M. (2012, Nov 19). Deep learning vs. surface learning: Getting students to understand the difference. Faculty Focus. [Web log]. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/deep-learning-vs-surface-learning-getting-students-to-understand-the-difference/

by Jerod Quinn, Instructional Designer, CTTL

I warned my students this past semester that there would be a certain level of ambiguity inherent in my “introduction to technology” class. I was not going to walk them through using every application we discuss, but I would instead expect them to “figure it out” on their own. I promised them it would be frustrating at times, but learning is frustrating at times. As it turns out, I too had to eat my own words.

I am a techie by nature, so a course designed to introduce students to gadgets and apps and to prompt their understanding about how those apps can be useful, especially for future educators, is right up my alley. As I began choosing which apps we would wrestle with, I decided early on that I wanted my students to be familiar with blogs and understand how to navigate the backend of a content management system. I wanted them reading and commenting on each other’s work, but I also wanted them writing and publishing their own work. With that in mind, I decided to use a public WordPress blog; www.edi399.com.

While the focus of this post will be about the experience of using a public WordPress blog in my class, I think the topic warrants a quick explanation of why I was using a blog in the first place. A blog can incorporate two of Chickering and Gamson’s “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education” fairly naturally: good practice encourages student faculty contact, and good practice encourages cooperation among students. In keeping with the traditions of a Jesuit university, I also wanted to incorporate a space for the students to reflect on their experiences in the class. Reflection is a very important part of Ignatian Pedagogy and is connected to the Jesuit commitment to the transformational power of education.

“But why WordPress? There’s a perfectly fine blogging tool in Blackboard or Campus Pack!” That’s true. Going with WordPress means more hassle on my part administering an additional website and more hassle for my students in having to access another online tool. But it also means they get experience using a real-world tool that their future employers or graduate schools may be using to manage their professional websites. When their future bosses ask them in an interview, “Do you have any experience navigating a content management system?” I wanted them to be able to give an enthusiastic, “Yes!” I have also gathered anecdotal evidence from other faculty that when students know their writing will be seen by their peers and possibly by future employers, they tend to put a little more effort into it.

Along the way, I encountered expected and unexpected challenges. Of all the things I have learned with this project, here are a few lessons that stand out in my mind.

• Having a self-hosted blog means you are now an instructor and a website administrator. You manage student login info, create how-to-use-this-blog videos, deal with comment spam, and troubleshoot technical issues with students.
• Students will always forget their login name or password, no matter how many times they have previously posted to the blog.
• Blog comments give you another space where you can push the critical thinking of students and challenge their assumptions.
• You need to be clear when assignments are to be turned in as blog posts. And even then, you will get a few emailed to you instead.
• While I required students to comment on each other’s work, I wonder if it would have occurred more naturally if they were writing to the blog more frequently?
• Depending on the questions you ask, you can get a picture of the student’s process of thinking as they wrestle with course material.
• Even though your host company’s servers have never gone down a single time in the five years you have had service with them, they will go down on the exact day and hour your biggest writing assignment of the semester is due, which of course, is submitted as a blog post. True story.
• The more you have students using the blog the better and more useful the blog gets. Commit to it being a major part of your class or don’t use a public blog.
• You spend the semester scaffolding their learning. You cover material and assign projects that build to a cumulative final project that is designed to be an evaluation asking if they have reached the course goals. They complete the project, then reflect on some questions about the project on the blog. You grade the project and then read the student reflections about the final project. As you read the reflections you realize, they get it. Your students understand the things you knew you needed them to understand when you began this course sixteen weeks ago. The blog gives you a place to celebrate that victory.

There’s always a risk when you try something new. There will be unforeseen problems like continual password resets and horribly timed server crashes. But risk is what makes teaching and learning exciting, and it makes payoffs all the more sweet. Trying something new will be frustrating at times, but learning is frustrating at times. With that in mind, I would absolutely use a public blog again for my class. The only thing I know I would do differently is to have it more incorporated into the class. I would want them to write and reflect more, even if that means resetting passwords every week.

Food for thought for those interested in blogging in the classroom:

• Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing
• Using Blogs in a College Classroom: What’s Authenticity Got to Do with It?

Dr. Beccy Aldrich explains how and why she partnered with a colleague at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden this spring 2013 semester to teach students about how culture influences the understanding of occupational therapy, geopolitics, and disability.

by Michaella Thornton, Assistant Director for Instructional Design

It is an inspiring and instructive privilege to be able to peek inside others’ classrooms to experience how others teach, hear how and why teachers make the choices they do for students, learning goals and objectives, and respective disciplines, and to consider how such possibilities may be transformed by those who teach elsewhere and/or do research on the scholarship of teaching and learning.

On Friday, April 19th past and current Innovative Teaching Fellows shared their perspectives about teaching in the Learning Studio, a state-of-the-art teaching space designed by a team of Saint Louis University faculty and students as part of the Herman Miller Learning Spaces Research Program.  Almost 40 full-time SLU faculty and administrators attended this at-capacity event.

Presenting CTTL Innovative Teaching Fellows included:

• Jenny Agnew, Ph.D., School for Professional Studies (Fall 2012), who discussed how her “ENGL 150:  The Process of Composition” students used theme-based writing projects via a public WordPress blog to explore the collaborative and on-going nature of writing, food, and culture, in addition to sharing how flexible classroom design may enhance the teaching of composition, especially in hosting teacher-student conferences, brainstorming sessions, and peer review.
• Beccy Aldrich, Ph.D., Department of Occupational Sciences and Occupational Therapy (Spring 2013), who shared how her “OCS 372: Occupations in Diverse Contexts” class uses immersive, collaborative learning technologies such as Fuze Meeting to connect with the Karolinska Institutet, a premier medical university located in Stockholm, Sweden, to foster a more globalized and diverse student perspective about occupational therapy.
• Paul Lynch, Ph.D., Department of English (Spring 2013), who shared how his graduate-level “ENGL 501: Teaching Writing” class uses a course blog and Google Docs to empower first-year composition instructors to co-construct assignments, the course syllabus, and model effective writing feedback for first-year composition students.
• Nathaniel Rivers, Ph.D., Department of English (Fall 2012), gave the audience a first-hand look at what he and his students have learned through the course, “ENGL 401: New Media Science Writing,” by sharing a snippet from his forthcoming jointly-created webtext, “Articulation.”  To see and/or hear a  different Vimeo video that sets the tone for the course Dr. Rivers held in the Learning Studio last fall, please click here.
• Thomas Stewart, J.D., School of Law (Fall 2012), who discussed how his first-year Evidence students used Google Docs and team-based and case-based learning to identify, apply, and contextualize the Federal Rules of Evidence (and the Missouri counterparts) to prepare students to practice law as professional attorneys.

We are so grateful to the Symposium panelists, who make this annual event possible by generously sharing their teaching and learning reflections with the larger Saint Louis University community.  [update on Tuesday, May 15th]: For those in the SLU community who were unable to attend the Symposium and would like to view a password-protected video, please email me at mthornt7[at]slu[dot]edu and I will enroll you in the CTTL Events course via Blackboard Learn.

Special thanks is also due to Flannery Burke, Ph.D., Department of History (Spring 2012), who prepared and introduced the Symposium panelists and deftly facilitated the Q&A session that immediately followed the panelists’ presentations.

We especially look forward to continuing the reflective conversation next April (2014) when we host our 3rd Annual Learning Studio Symposium.  Since the Innovative Teaching Fellowship program began in Fall 2011, the faculty who teach in the Learning Studio have much to share with the broader community about what teaching practices and educational technologies resonate with them, transfer to classrooms outside of the Learning Studio, the role of instructional design, and how providing space, time, and support to be in a new or refreshed mindset can make all the difference in reinvigorating or creating innovative learning environments for 21st Century students.

by Michaella Thornton, Assistant Director for Instructional Design, Reinert CTTL

First, a brief, lively video explanation of what digital media curation is:

What is Curation? from Percolate on Vimeo.

There’s an exciting movement underway regarding the tried-and-true textbook.  The Internet, digital scholarship, open-access journals, academic crowd-sourcing, and on-going debates about providing equitable, affordable, and timely course information to students have all contributed to educators questioning the role (and possibly even the relevancy) of the almighty textbook.  There’s even an Institute for the Future of the Book. The first sentence of their mission statement reads: “The printed page is giving way to the networked screen.”  True enough.  But how true is this statement for professors and college students?

While a great textbook can help organize numerous concepts and content into more manageable and organized chapters, textbooks can sometimes become instructional crutches, overly relied on for coverage-based courses instead of thinking about why a particular text or series of texts serves as a primary authority on a subject or how such a text supports the learning objectives of the course, among a bevy of important skills many of us hope students hone and use beyond our classes: critical reflection, deep and close reading, analytical thinking, and encouraging students to connect the dots between the texts they read to their lives, other texts, and the world at large.

Some commonly used digital curation tools that many teachers are finding success with, especially in co-constructing course reading lists and co-creating collaborative learning experiences with students, include:

• Twitter: Instructional designer Jerod Quinn wrote a great primer about using social media in the classroom in an earlier blog post, in addition to getting the most out of this micro-blogging and bookmarking tool.
• Pinterest: This visual bulletin board is not just for the super crafty or photo-obsessed. Professors are using Pinterest for “visual sharing in architecture, photography, design, and art classes,” among many other things.
• Diigo: Diigo first started out as an online bookmarking tool. Nowadays the website and app allows users to “collect and highlight, then remember.” Many educators use this tool to create reading lists with students and to organize web-based research.
• Bit.ly Bundles: Helps professors unify, organize, and then share web-based information more easily with students. For an example, check out the blog, Technology for Academics.
• iBooks Author, Red Staple, and Folium Book Studio: There are many ways to e-publish a course text. These are a couple options to help you consider the possibilities if you’re interested in creating your own course text.

So, what digital curation methods do you employ in your classes?   Do you view your role as a curator of educational experiences?  If so, how do you help students explore compelling questions through the digital learning objects you’ve assembled?

by Sandy Gambill, Instructional Designer, Reinert Center for Transformative Teaching & Learning

Classroom flipping, or using technology like Tegrity to move lecture out of physical class time, is all the rage these days, but what actually makes it an effective learning strategy for students?  Faculty are invited to attend an informal brainstorming conversation on effective flipping practices on April 17 from Noon to 1:00 pm in Allied Health Room 2002.

Questions to be considered

How do you prepare students for the flipped model?

What are effective strategies for getting students to do the out of class work?

What does physical class time look like if you are not lecturing?

Resources

What is the Flipped Classroom Infograph

http://www.knewton.com/flipped-classroom/

7 Things You Should Know about the Flipped Classroom

http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/7-things-you-should-know-about-flipped-classrooms

St Louis Post Dispatch Article featuring SLU’s Professor Michael Lewis:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/flipped-classrooms-homework-in-class-online-lectures-at-home/article_529a4e07-0f60-5382-aaa1-3bb8688373dc.html

Full-time faculty members are cordially invited to the Paul C. Reinert, S.J. Center for Transformative Teaching & Learning’s 2nd Annual Learning Studio Symposium from 2-3:30 p.m. Friday, April 19, in room 213 in Des Peres Hall.  Refreshments will follow the symposium in the first-floor International Lounge in Des Peres Hall. Interested attendees are invited to register online (Seating is limited, so priority will be given to full time faculty.)

Past and current Innovative Teaching Fellows will share their perspectives and experiences about teaching in the Learning Studio, a state-of-the-art teaching space designed by a team of faculty and students as part of the Herman Miller Learning Spaces Research Program.  For more information about the Learning Studio, visit the CTTL website.

Presenting CTTL Innovative Teaching Fellows will include:

• Jenny Agnew, Ph.D., School for Professional Studies
• Beccy Aldrich, Ph.D., Department of Occupational Sciences and Occupational Therapy
• Paul Lynch, Ph.D., Department of English
• Nathaniel Rivers, Ph.D., Department of English
• Thomas Stewart, J.D., School of Law
  

Flannery Burke, Ph.D., Department of History, will introduce the symposium panel and facilitate the conversation. Symposium presenters and attendees will also have an opportunity to discuss how to create engaging and interactive learning experiences designed especially for today’s learners and how these lessons may be extended into others’ classrooms and teaching philosophies.

Please note: The front entrance of Des Peres Hall is currently under construction. Enter Des Peres Hall on the second-floor entrance via the back (south) stairwell, which faces Laclede Ave. For those who need accommodations, access to the basement of Des Peres Hall requires a SLU ID swipe and needs to be requested in advance by contacting Jane Jones, Program Director of Disability Services, at (314) 977-8885 or jjone166@slu.edu.

In this second in series of conversations with faculty, Leslie Hinyard, Assistant Professor and Associate Director for Academic Affairs at SLUCOR, talks with Sandy Gambill, about engaging a wide spectrum of students in an online Masters of Science in Health Outcomes Research.

To listen to the first podcast, click here.

For the full pdf transcript of this podcast, click here.

Dr. Hinyard serves as the Associate Director of Academic Affairs at SLUCOR and oversees all curriculum and graduate programs. Dr. Hinyard’s research interests include methods for identifying patients with diabetes mellitus from large administrative databases and the relationship between gender and asthma exacerbations. She has also conducted research in the area of narrative cancer communication.

Photo and bio courtesy of http://www.slu.edu/slucor

EAL Podcast: Julie Wolter Transcription