43
COMPREHENSIVE DOCTORAL EXAMINATION Program Core – Question 1 Department of Curriculum and Instruction Illinois State University Normal, IL 61790 Terry Edwin Mullin Spring, 2005 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................... 2 THE EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE............................................2 THE ANTICIPATED CLIENTELE/CONTENT.........................................2 Who Are the Clientele, What is the Content?................................................................................. 2 Why Choose This Group?................................................................................................................ 3 What Would Be the Major Content Components.......................................................................... 3 Project Based Structure.................................................................................................................. 3

COMPREHENSIVE DOCTORAL EXAMINATION - …terrytube.net/Dissertation/ComprehensiveExamination_… · Web viewCOMPREHENSIVE DOCTORAL EXAMINATION - terrytube.net

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

COMPREHENSIVE DOCTORAL EXAMINATION

Program Core – Question 1

Department of Curriculum and InstructionIllinois State University

Normal, IL 61790

Terry Edwin MullinSpring, 2005

Table of ContentsTABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................................2

THE EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE.......................................................................................................2

THE ANTICIPATED CLIENTELE/CONTENT.....................................................................................................2Who Are the Clientele, What is the Content?.........................................................................................2Why Choose This Group?.......................................................................................................................3What Would Be the Major Content Components....................................................................................3Project Based Structure..........................................................................................................................3Developing Software Expertise in the Major..........................................................................................4Essential Concepts from the Text............................................................................................................5

THE EDUCATIONAL MODEL.........................................................................................................................5Principle Elements..................................................................................................................................6Advantages and Disadvantages of Learner-Centered Education...........................................................9

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY.......................................................................................................................9

Access to Technology..............................................................................................................................9Technology Overload............................................................................................................................10

EXISTING CURRICULAR STRUCTURE...............................................................................................11

TRADITIONAL MODEL................................................................................................................................12Advantages and Disadvantages to this Curricular Structure...............................................................12The Relationship Between Curriculum and Instruction........................................................................13

CURRICULUM MODIFICATIONS..................................................................................................................14Objections to the Modifications............................................................................................................14

METHODOLOGY FOR SUCCESS...........................................................................................................16

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE METHODOLOGY.................................................................16EVALUATION..............................................................................................................................................17

Problems with the Assessment..............................................................................................................21Problem Resolution...............................................................................................................................21

RESEARCH FOR THIS METHOD...........................................................................................................21

TYPE OF RESEARCH...................................................................................................................................21Subject Matter/Instruction....................................................................................................................22

RESEARCH DESIGN.....................................................................................................................................22Why This Method is Appropriate..........................................................................................................23Advantages and Disadvantages............................................................................................................24

COMPREHENSIVE EXAM CRITERIA..................................................................................................25

EVIDENCE/PROVIDE EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENTATION............................................................................25DOCUMENTED SUPPORT.............................................................................................................................25JUSTIFY SIGNIFICANT ETHICAL ISSUES......................................................................................................25

CONCLUSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS..............................................................................................27

INDEX...........................................................................................................................................................28

page 2

Management Information Systems 240

Introduction

The Management Information Systems class (MS 240) at Millikin University in Decatur, Illinois, was designed to give all business students a fundamental understanding of computer information systems.  This second-semester sophomore-level college course is taken by all business students with majors ranging on a continuum from finance and accounting majors, which focus on details, to international business and economic majors, which focus on the generalities or “the big picture” of business. The course traditionally is taught as a lecture class and tends to be perceived by the students as dull, passive and a general waste of time. This course was an ideal candidate to be redesigned.

The Educational Experience

“Describe how you would design/redesign that educational experience for the clientele of your choice in that situation. You might decide, for example, that the clientele would be undergraduates in their first business course, or alternatively, persons enrolled in a graduate degree program. The experience could be conducted in a "lesson," unit, course, workshop, instructional module and/or through a standard classroom, internship, distance learning, telecommunications, Internet, television, radio, computer, audio, video, multimedia or other suitable instructional format or combination thereof.” (excerpt from the comprehensive exam)

The Anticipated Clientele/Content

Who Are the Clientele, What is the Content?The structure of MS 240 was a three hour lecture per week that forced the students to take lecture notes over abstract concepts from material in a course textbook that they had not read. The course did not utilize any visual aids or overheads, no work was done in groups, and the students were such passive learners that, according to the department chair, attending classes seemed irrelevant to the students. Course content was the dissemination of information to the students. The department chair and dean of the business school were concerned that the course had “little relevance to the students” and therefore questioned the degree of learning that took place in the course.

Although all the students in this course were from the business school, they differed in their majors. The majors included marketing, accounting, entrepreneurial, economics, management information systems, business administration, human resources, finance, management, international business, and business undecided. All business majors are required to take this class.

page 3

Why Choose This Group?The prior courses taken by these students were general in nature, developing a liberal art education. They have taken two courses in critical writing and reasoning, a Microsoft office course, started their foreign language series or semiotic series (students were required to take three courses that utilize symbols in the course if they did not take a foreign language) and began their quantitative reasoning courses with an entry level statistics course. This group of students was important to the school of business because it was the beginning of their movement to their major. This course in information systems, properly handled, could give the students insight into their major and help students either assure their choice of major or give a means for those unsure or undecided to solidify their choice of major. There isn’t any major that does not depend on the use of computers and a structured information system. This course can be thought of as a hub of a wheel whose spokes lead to all majors, i.e., the content of the course is common ground to all majors and thereby created an opportunity to reach all the students with integrating concepts.

What Would Be the Major Content ComponentsIt seems logical that the different majors create a continuum that could be organized into three groups: 1) the big picture or most general and theoretical consisting of International Business, Economic, Business Undecided majors; 2) middle ground with an organizational perspective consisting of Management, Marketing, Business Administration, Human Resources, Entrepreneurial majors; and 3) the “nuts and bolts”, the specific, detailed end of the continuum consisting of Accounting, Finance, Management Information Systems (Computer Programming) majors.

By utilizing this continuum, the content of the course needed to change in order to benefit each of these groups (subdivided into the individual majors). The course needed to be developed that each group came out of the course with an understanding of information systems would benefit them on an individual basis based on their own major and learning style.

I had seen in my previous teaching experience the traditional thinking that the students have to match the courses and not the courses match the students. I use to teach financial accounting to a section of dance majors because their curriculum required them to have one semester of accounting. Since the accounting course was “once size fits all”, I had to teach them the intricate calculations (amortization schedules) using the effective interest rate method (time value of money concept) when making journal entries for recording the semi-annual interest payment of discounted and premium bonds. Clearly, the content of the course did not match the needs of the students.

Project Based StructureBy moving to a project-based structure for the course, I was able to meet the needs of the students. I developed a detailed scenario of a family owned ski resort (Timber Lake Mountain Resort a.k.a. TLMR) in the Colorado mountains. The scenario utilized time to delineate how the business developed and grew post WWII as did their need for information. Ultimately, the project story puts the students into the present day where the

page 4

two children of mom and pop return from college with their newly acquired college degrees (of the student’s choice) and the family decides to increase the number of rooms at the lodge by 50%. The bank issuing the loan required TLMR to investigate the need for an electronic information system. It was the job of the students in this course to be consultants to the family and develop an electronic information system to replace the pencil and paper information system already in place.

The beauty of this project is that each student, working in groups of five to six, was to develop his/her part of the project from his/her own perspective and major. The project-based structure allowed them to share their research and findings with their groups and disseminate information well beyond the capabilities of the classroom.

For example, accounting students would incorporate knowledge from their current classes and previously taken classes to look at the accounting viewpoint of the information system. They could identify how to keep more accurate records, how to use data to forecast, and how to easily calculate costs for decision making. Marketing students could develop how to use the accounting data to attract new guests, how to increase occupancy in off seasons, and how to attract an international focus to the lodge. Entrepreneurial students could view the project as an opportunity remodel ground floor, street access rooms to open a bakery, gift shop, butcher shop, Internet café or ski shop that serviced the lodge and the passersby, and so on and so on. Each major could now be identified as to what contributions could be made to the project by rich, meaningful discussions in class.

The majority of the students (according to the classroom exit survey and final project discussion) responded well when they felt they had the control to determine the outcome of the project. In business, we teach motivational theory to students and give them the basics from scientific management of Gilbreth to the work of Mayo in the Hawthorne studies, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and Hertzerg’s ideas on motivation, to name but a few. This project-oriented focus brings out the Y theory in the students—they want to do well and work towards goals they understand. They can perceive the rewards (understanding information systems as it relates to them) and by giving them that empowerment, they will learn significantly more.

Developing Software Expertise in the MajorA second area of this project-focused course is to give them the tools to develop software expertise in their major area, a supporting concept to their project work. I converted one class per week to a lab. We worked on advanced Microsoft Office features that were relevant to all the student majors. Although they all performed pre-designed assignments, the content of the computer projects was of their own making and was encouraged by the instructor to produce outcomes directly related to their milestones. I simply demonstrated the key strokes that allowed them to solve a business problem and they adapted the new skill to their own major. The initial student learning is just the key strokes.

page 5

Ultimately, they learned how the keystrokes could be used to solve a business problem. The latter is a focus of most current teaching techniques. It is not important just to teach the keystrokes since the key strokes change. Teaching students how to solve problems utilizing technology i.e., teaching them how to learn, is the real learning.

As I taught the individual projects, I utilized the thinking of Mindful Learning, developed by Ellen J. Langer. She looked at how we educate our students. Her arguments, converted to a computer science analogy, were that we should not teach our students to become robots. Robots are programmed to produce the same results time after time. We should be educating our students “to fulfill their potential to live meaningful, productive lives.”1 (a justification issue). Her technique was to give assignments to students but ask them to put the assignment into a specific perspective such as being a business manager or the consumer of a product and not just their own perspective.

With this in mind, I gave students assignments to do but put the projects in a frame of reference. For example, when working with SQL statements (Structured Query Language that is code which retrieves information from a database), I would ask them to think from the perspective of a business manager who had questions about how many people came and how often to Timber Lake Mountain Resort from outside of Colorado; or a check for $500 was improperly recorded and how could an accounts receivable clerk find a list of all the people who had $500 credited to their account for the past 30 days. They could understand why a manager or clerk would need to know this information and gave them a mental reference when teaching them how to write the code.

Essential Concepts from the TextA final component of the course was one day a week to teach the content of the chapters in the class textbook. The lectures were focused on essential concepts in the chapters and not on covering the chapters in their entirety. The chapters were a means of giving students the fundamental information about major topics such as how the Internet and local area network work or the components of a computer. The text became a reference where students could read depending upon their interest and validity to their projects. Since the focus was not on having to read the text from cover to cover, students tended to read more of the book. (A survey given at the end of the courses provided this information.)

The Educational ModelThe theory behind learner-centered education is that "Learner-Centered Education targets instructional strategies that elicit and build upon students' interests and skills. It is based on the belief and observations that we all learn most effectively when we are designing or creating things in which we have a substantial measure of control over our own explorations."2

1 Langer, Ellen, “Mindful Learning”, retrieved from http://www.greensense.com/Marketplace/Books/power_mindful_learn.htm, May, 20052 Stanta Clara County Office of Education, http://etc.sccoe.k12.ca.us/i2000/00mod/b_projects/learner.html.

page 6

Cognitive psychologist Mitchell Resnick suggests that teachers need to design their courses that enable students to design. It is this design process where the most learning occurs.3 He also suggests that as instructors redesign lesson plans for some of their classes, they will quickly want to look at more and more of their other lesson plans. The most common strategies that produce this type of learning are also are known as project-based learning, engaged learning, expeditionary learning or constructivism.

This design, as described above, agrees with Dr. Resnick's approach that learner-centered teaching and the use of computers gives the students a sense of ownership in their education. They feel more related to their learning and therefore more aware of their relatedness. Students also become more responsible for their own education. By being actively involved in their education, more learning should be taking place.

The role of the instructor should be to teach students how to learn.  Instructors should not be a deliverer or disseminator of facts.  A good example would be computer software.  If a teacher would teach a student all the keystrokes of the software, what value have they really learned?  Within 18 months, based on one of the long standing principles in computer science (Moore’s law states that the power of computers is doubling every 18 months), the software will change, including keystrokes.  If all the student learned was the keystrokes, then everything learned is now lost.  If, instead, an instructor teaches a student how to learn, the knowledge lives on forever.  Instructors can teach from two major perspectives:

1. Self efficacy (an individual's estimate or personal judgment of his or her own ability to succeed in reaching a specific goal4) creates confidence in that the student can learn the software package with time and practice.

2. Cognitive spontaneity or playfulness so that the student is not intimidated by the software and will try combinations of keystrokes to see what happens.

If an instructor is successful in these two areas, then we can say that the students have learned how to learn and true learning has taken place.  It is not the ends; it is the means that counts.

Principle ElementsThe following is a closer look at Learner-Centered Education:

The Balance of Power:

Traditional power in the classroom is held by the instructor not the students.  The instructor stands in front of the classroom behind a desk, controls the order and discipline of the classroom, and dictates the actions of the hour.  Students' role was to learn without any say in the process of learning. 

Politically, education has been a vehicle for social change: "to change inequality and dominate myths rather than socialize students into the status quo...  true learning

3 Stanta Clara County Office of Education, http://etc.sccoe.k12.ca.us/i2000/00mod/b_projects/learner.html.4 http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:Self+efficacy (Google Dictionary search)

page 7

empowers students to challenge oppression in their lives" 5.  We have studied in C&I 576 the political perspectives   (this hyperlink is a chart developed by Dr. Toll for the course that shows the political perspective by categorical names) that shaped education.  The shift is towards democratic and egalitarian vies or struggles of education that translates into student motivation and engagement (issues for a classical sense of justification).  Learner-Centered Teaching moves this balance of power to equilibrium whereas the teacher and the student are equals in the learning process.  They share the responsibility for learning, ultimately empowering the student.

The Function of Content:

Oftentimes students concentrate on memorizing facts. They focus on bits and pieces of reading that are disjointed and collectively do not create a coherent knowledge of a topic.  When students focus on what an author meant, they relate it to new information or they can connect it to what they already know and organize or structure the information; their experience produces learning.  As instructors, we should look at course content in light of what the long term results are.  If we push to cover material only to have it forgotten, then why bother with the initial process?  Why push to cover and otherwise convey more content?  Ramsden notes that

"Learning should be seen as a qualitative change in a person/s way of seeing, experiencing, understanding, conceptualizing something in the real word--rather than as a quantitative change in the amount of knowledge someone possesses"6.

"Constructivist approaches emphasize learners' actively constructing their own knowledge rather than passively receiving information transmitted to them from teachers and textbooks.  For a constructivist perspective, knowledge cannot simple be given to students: Students must construct their own meanings"7.

 The Role of the Teacher:

As stated above, the role of the teacher changes dramatically in a learner-centered environment.  The power becomes shared with each person having a stake in the outcome of the learning event.  In a constructionist approach, students must interact with content long before they have expertise on a subject.  They need to develop, challenge, relate, discuss what they have learned and then, as they develop their knowledge base or expertise, the quality of their intellectual discussion will increase.  The instructor's role is to help the student develop over time.  It is a crawl, walk, run

5 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 8.6 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 11.7 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 11.

page 8

situation where the student is not expected to have all the answers in the beginning.  The teacher becomes more of the coach working along side and not over the individual student. It is important to realize that as teachers, their role changes, not diminishes.

The Responsibility for Learning:

Formal education as it exist now makes the students dependent learners because they rely on the teacher to identify what needs to be learned, to stipulate the learning methods and to assess what and how all they have learned.  The student enters the classroom, receives all of the instructions from the teacher, follows the syllabus on everything that has to be done, and waits for the teacher to assess if he/she has done it properly.  Students do not become autonomous self-regulating learners on their own.  They do not develop purely through exposure to the content--they must be taught how to do so. 

Validation

The process takes time and patients.  I fought validation issues every class day with my MS 240 course on students learning information systems.  Students constantly ask me what it is that they are supposed to know about a topic.  When I asked them what it was that they learned when they went out and researched materials for their project, they would spend 20 minutes giving me detail after detail of what they learned, how it fits into the big picture, and how they feel that it is the right decision for the project.  Although they have learned, they still wanted that validation from someone; a score to compare what percentage of what they discovered was what they should have discovered.  

Evaluation Purpose and Processes:

Assessment promotes learning but is it the right learning?  Biggs said "What and how students learn depends to a major extent on how they think they will be assessed.  Assessment practices must send the right signals"8.  Assessment becomes the most effective tool that an instructor has to promote learning. Therefore, we should use the fact that we are going to use assessment in our classroom as a tool.  Students will learn based on how they think they are going to be assessed.  By looking at how we assess our students, we are sending a clear signal to them about our expectations of what and how they are to learn.  Changes in assessment can change what is learned.

In 1995, Barr and Tagg outlined the paradigm shift from teaching to learning and suggest that thru this new learning theory, learning will be student-centered and controlled, with the new paradigm teaching them how to learn as much as it teaches what to learn.  They describe faculty as "instructional designers who put together challenging and complex

8 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 17.

page 9

learning experiences and then create environments that empower students to accomplish the goals."9

(A paper I have written on Learned Centered Education/Instruction can be found by hyper-linking to this site: (http://www.acs.ilstu.edu/faculty/Mullin/ci530/LearnerCenteredTeaching.htm).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Learner-Centered EducationIn a study by Shirley Reushle, her aim was that “hypermedia programs will encourage a move from mass instruction to a more learner centered, individualized approach: a move from reception learning to discovery and interactive learning resulting in learning outcomes moving from competence-based and performance-based to meta-cognitive and transfer-based education and training”10. With this movement to hypermedia, we need to have in place the resources to foster this change.

Educational Technology

“If you plan to use educational technology as part of your design, how would you deal with problems associated with the technology you have chosen?  These problems could include, but are not limited to access to the technology by the participants and ‘technology overload’ in today’s educational institutions.” (excerpt from the comprehensive examination)

Access to Technology

By changing the focus from producing “cookie cutter” results to the students submitting answers based upon their individual preferences to learn, the issues of technology increase in importance. Technology becomes a vehicle to allow this type of learning to germinate and grow. Fortunately, junior colleges and universities here in the Midwest typically have access to computers (access to technology) in labs and many institutions have computer labs in the classroom itself (Heartland Community College has rooms set up where tables are in the middle of the room and the perimeter of the rooms are computer lined.)

In addition, the majority of the students already have computers in their own rooms Four years ago, according to the network administrator Pat Pettit, over 60% of incoming freshmen at Millikin brought their computers into the network resources department to be configured for the network connection in their dorm rooms. The major issue wasn’t availability of the computers and software, it was software version control. Students often have more up-to-date software than the university and therefore have the ability to perform keystrokes in software that were not available in the university labs. Since Learner-Centered Education does not require them to produce specific results that would be dependent on software availability (specific versions), they simply produce what they 9 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 1810 Reushle, S. E. (1995). Design Considerations and Features in the Development of Hypermedia Courseware, Distance Education, 16(1), 141-56.

page 10

can with what they have (a concept that parallels the state of the real world). The focus is the learning process not the end results. I do teach them practical bridges to the more common technology issues such as how to include the PowerPoint viewer in the “package and go” feature so that they can always display their presentations no matter what version is available.

Technology OverloadOverload is significant to today’s students since there are so many electronic means to the end. I help students by utilizing models that they already know and understand. For example, to help them manage when to use what resource, I put all of my course structure (course schedule) into a simple calendar format. The columns are, for example, the days the course meets (M,W,F) or by areas (Week#, In the Classroom, To Do Online, Notes & Additional Resources) as seen in this small example (this M,W course started on a Wednesday):

Week Number

In the Classroom(Readings &

Assignments)

To Do Online(Due by the following

classroom period)Notes and Additional

Resources

June 1-3

Week 1 

Monday, June 1  Holiday - No Class   Holiday - No Class  This site best viewed

at resolution of 1024X768.

Wednesday, June 36-8 pm Course Introduction, Meet others in your Managerial Accounting 201 community. Demo of WebCT where you will find instruction on how to log into WebCT, the syllabus, course schedule, quizzes, email, discussion boards, & course website.

Before Class time Next Monday, June 8:  Read Chapter 2 and do Homework for Chapter 2   Sign into WebCT (see “How to..” on left)  Take Quiz 2 online (pre-quiz) by clicking the WebCT “Take a Quiz” icon

Signing onto WebCT will be demonstrated in class the first day. Discuss in classroom on next Monday, June 8, any problems in completing assignments, navigating WebCT, etc.  Be sure to utilize the end of the chapter comprehensive problem for understanding the material.  Key Terms Chapter 1.

The rows are weeks of the semester and are labeled with dates. When they need to use WebCT for an assignment, I put a link for them to click that will take them to that technology. What this calendar ultimately does is help keep them organized so that they can complete the block of any given day and know that they have a macro-version checklist of what needs to be done. Additionally, I work with the students in the classroom to break larger projects into smaller more manageable pieces. When they need to refer back to previous knowledge (e.g., “How do I log into WebCT?”), they always can reference this schedule to find this information.

page 11

A second means of managing technology overload is in teaching students how to effectively use these tools so they are not overwhelmed. For instance, I teach them how to utilize the Outline View of Microsoft Word so they can manage the pieces when writing a paper. Again, this technological feature (Outline View) allows them to literally break down large papers into smaller more manageable pieces by using Heading tags.

The use of course software, such as WebCT and Blackboard, has contributed significantly to helping students manage electronic materials. These software packages provide the secure log in of students and then arrange by use of icons, the components of the course. Students identify with and remember the icons and thereby maintain the reference to needed materials.

Many studies exist as to user acceptance of technology. A well-known and widely accepted model is Technology Acceptance Model by Davis, 1989. In its original form, the model defined the constructs of perceived usefulness as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance, and perceived ease of use as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort”11. When students perceived that the technology was useful and easy to learn, it led to a positive attitude towards its use and ultimately, it actual use.

There are probably no fool-proof ways to manage the information overload. It simply becomes what we as instructors need to help students manage (the changing role from instructor to coach).

Existing Curricular Structure

“Both you and the chairperson understand that the experience would have to fit into the existing conventional Business School curricular structure, but you are encouraged to propose changes in the curriculum if you believe those changes would be useful and/or necessary.” (excerpt from the comprehensive exam) 

Traditional Model

“Identify the ‘model’ or ‘conception’ of curriculum that best describes the common or ‘conventional’ Business School curriculum, including advanced study as well as undergraduate programs.” (excerpt from the comprehensive exam)

Curriculum in business schools is based on the set of courses and their contents offered by an institution and traditionally subdivide the courses by function. Students receive fundamental courses that give them the background of generalized studies and then

11 Davis, Fred, “User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts”, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Volume 38, Issue 3 , March 1993, Pages 475-487.

page 12

proceed to their advanced studies in their area of choice. The student’s complete university general studies and then subdivide by majors (function). The guiding factor for this breakdown is the institution’s mission statement.

The following is the mission statement for Millikin University, home of the Tabor School of Business and the MS 240 course.

Millikin's Mission12:

“Millikin's mission is to offer an education that integrates the traditional liberal arts and the practical arts of the professions. Guided by faculty and staff, and within an inclusive and broadly accessible learning community, our students discover and pursue their full potential, personally and professionally, to do well and to do good.

Mission:

To Deliver on the Promise of EducationAt Millikin, we prepare students for Professional success; Democratic citizenship in a global environment; A personal life of meaning and value.”

Advantages and Disadvantages to this Curricular StructureThe advantage of providing structure is that structure gives a common ground for looking at how the system is. No matter what structure is used, the intent is to provide a means of evaluating whether or not the student has achieved the practical goals as outlined by the institution’s mission statement.

The disadvantage with using business functions as a means of organizing student progress is that majors suffer by not providing a means for students to integrate one set of information with another. The business instructors do not integrate, for example, the significance of marketing with finance and accounting or international business. As simplistic as it may seem, little communications exists between the instructor teaching students how to write functions in an electronic spreadsheet (for example, how to calculate the payment of a loan, the present value of a capital expenditure, or the use of an If, Then, Else statement for traversing a decision tree model) and the instructors at higher level courses that could better utilize class time if students had these skills in their repertoire.

The Relationship Between Curriculum and Instruction To present the relationship between curriculum and instruction in simplistic terms, curriculum is what the students should learn and instruction decides how the “what” should be accomplished. I use a pyramidto demonstrate this concept in my business courses. The 12 http://www.millikin.edu/about/mission.asp. Retrieved from the Internet May, 2005.

page 13

upper level, or strategic level, is where upper management decides what changes need to occur. Examples may be the decision to lower operating expenses by 2% or the need to shift manufacturing facilities to foreign countries with cheaper labor markets. The tactical level carries out these directives and decides how to accomplish these tasks. Mangers at this level might engineer plastic components for a widget to replace existing metal pieces thereby reducing expenses. Middle management would evaluate the process of utilizing legislation from NAFTA (North America Free Trade Agreement) so factories could be built in Mexico. The operational level becomes the day-to-day events that physically make the changes occur. The movement from the top of the pyramid to the bottom moves from abstraction to concrete, long-term to short-term, undefined to defined.

Likewise, the curriculum is the strategic, abstract level of what students should accomplish in their educational travel. Instructors interpret these top-level goals and create the mid-level objectives that will satisfy or possibly satisfice the “how” requirement, a movement away from abstraction to concrete. The course calendar might become how the operational level puts the process in action.

Most institutions permit instructors the concept of academic freedom meaning each instructor has the freedom, without reprisal, to interpret the curriculum when designing his/her instruction. Some institutions, such as many of the online courses, want strict control over the instruction. The instructors can only deliver course information thereby removing the individual’s ability to “teach”. The education interpretation (gap) that occurs between these two concepts (curriculum and instruction) can benefit or cripple the end results. On one hand (benefit), research dictates that a “normative conception of teaching is necessary if adequate description, assessment, and ultimately improvement are to be realized.13 A normative approach to teaching requires the freedom to teach and not just deliver materials. On the other hand (cripple), strict control becomes “damage control” for poor teaching.

Curriculum ModificationsThe role of curriculum is to outline the educational “blueprint” for student success. The coursework should be relevant to the individual student and, if the desired outcome is job procurement, provide those necessary skills.

My suggested work is not in what students should learn, although the blueprint should always be the guiding force, but in how they should learn. By recognizing the diversity of learning and then providing a mechanism to reach all of those styles of learning, we facilitate the process. It is how the students learn that drives how we teach. It is important at this juncture to state that “Whatever teachers may do, they do not produce learning: learning is the student's achievement, not the teacher's

13 Rhodes, Dent M., “Towards a Normative Conception of Teaching”, Illinois State University, Revision 3, September, 1992.

page 14

achievement”14. We can only set the stage, the esthetic environment, for learning to occur.

Objections to the ModificationsMany instructors are not proficient in today’s technologies. Few have mastered the simplistic concepts of earlier technologies such as embedding a video in a PowerPoint presentation. And, there is always a resistance to change since change requires energy. Most professors are overworked in hours and institutional requirements that, even though they see the benefits in education, few have the drive to move their technology expertise from point A B.

To increase the desire for making the change, I would suggest that change requires the same factors necessary in business: management support. If deans and chairpersons see the value, they can provide the support and become the catalyst for change. Exposing the faculty to good examples would be first (see next paragraph below). Creating workshops that move from simple to complex would follow.

A good visual example of what could be accomplished is the work done by students in an ITK 352 Multimedia course at Illinois State University. This design is for the course syllabus and other supporting course materials. To understand my example, it is imperative that the reader link to this site (click the citation or the image below) and have speakers attached to hear the audio. It is my feeling that to understand the nature of using a multimedia, interactive interface, one needs to experience it, not just read about it just as one wouldn’t want to take a distance education course by sitting in the classroom When you are in the browser, view the opening screen. Then, mouseover the “Course Menu” to select hyperlinks to additional materials.

http://www.itk.ilstu.edu/faculty/javila/ITk352/projects/Project/Flash/ITK352_Flash.html

This site is one of many examples that provide the visual, audio, entertainment, and organizational properties discussed in this paper. It was developed in FlashMX and once instructors have gathered all the pieces of the course and know the design they want, the interface can be easily developed and maintained.

14 Rhodes, Dent M., “Towards a Normative Conception of Teaching”, Illinois State University, Revision 3, September, 1992.

page 15

Another site, developed by students in a multimedia course using DreamweaverMX, offers a look at how to organize materials to help manage information overload, offers a sense of entertainment, allows for interactivity, and supports the concept that students learn when they “build something”. Please visit this site and especially look thru the milestone options. The project was for designing a website where students could sell books to each other at a fraction of the bookstore costs.

http://138.87.169.63/XM367232/index.html

Methodology for Success

“You, the chairperson, your colleagues and perhaps even a few students will surely want some information about any positive, or negative, results of your work.  Describe the principal features of a methodology you would use to determine the success and/or quality of either the educational experience or the curriculum modification you propose.” (excerpt from the comprehensive exam)

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Methodology

To be able to evaluate student performance, one needs to know the objectives. The evaluation process becomes a means to measure whether or not the objectives have been met.

page 16

As discussed above, the course is based in a semester-long project. The design of the project allows for students to develop their own understanding of how their discipline interacts with information systems. The new course objectives are:

Each student should be able to:

Preliminary Investigation:

1. Define the problems and issues that surround the existing system within the Timber Lake Mountain Resort Project (TLMRP).

2. Discuss the feasibility of converting a non-computerized system to a computerized system.

Analysis:

1. Critically analyze the steps needed to convert a non-computerized system to a computerized system.

2. Identify the devices that comprise a computer system applicable to Timber Lake Mountain Resort Project and describe the functions of each.

3. Describe and discuss the importance of data as business assets and the need for Information Technology (IT) capabilities in businesses.

4. Describe structured programming and its underlying principles and methods as it pertains to TLMR.

Design:

1. Create technical business information systems plan for a small company using a system development life cycle approach.

2. Identify and then design security and privacy issues faced by moving to a computerized system.

Implementation:

1. Prepare and then present to an external panel the findings of the semester long project that show, in detail, how the above objectives will be implemented.

Notice that the categories in the objectives reflect the organization of the System Development Life Cycle.

Evaluation With the help of Dr. Wendy Troxel, Director of Assessment at Illinois State University, Normal, IL, I developed this table for Learning and Assessment. This table provided a structure for the design of the MS 240 course and was supported by the coursework and materials learned in my doctorate.

page 17

Step one of these processes, and the help of Dr. Rhodes, led me to the creation of the objectives listed above. Step 4 was accomplished by creating a rubric of what the project should look like. I utilized this rubric not only in the grading of each of the 5 milestones but also gave the rubric to an outside panel that evaluated the over project during the group presentations at the end of the semester to guide their evaluation of the presentations.

The panel consisted of people from academia, the hotel/restaurant industry, and SCORE (“Counselors to America’s Small Business). The advantage of using this combination of people is that it put the students in a real business situation of their presentation being evaluated on the success of accomplishing their role as consultants to Timber Lake Mountain Resorts.

Planning for Learning and Assessment

1.  What general outcomes are you seeking? This step is a macro view and should include 5-10 learning objectives for the course. These outcomes are your intended outcomes.

2.  How would you know it (the outcome) if you saw it? What will the student know or be able to do? What does it look like if they can do it?

3.  How will you help students learn it? This step is in or out of the classroom. What activities will I, the instructor use to help them learn?  Will I use lecture, group work, etc. to accomplish this step?

4.  How could you measure each of the desired behaviors listed in step #2? What is the criterion level of performance? Can a Rubric be used to measure the outcome?

5.  What are the assessment findings? What is the final project?

6.  What future changes or improvements might be made based on the assessment findings?

The webpage for this assessment structure can be found at: Planning for Learning and Assessment at http://www.acs.ilstu.edu/faculty/Mullin/PlanninfLearningAssessment.htm

Step 5 also encouraged me to assess the student’s perspective of their own work by means of a survey which I utilized in my EAF 509 and 510 research courses. The survey was designed to give me information about the student’s progress using both finite and open-ended questions. The survey follows:

page 18

MS 240 SurveyPlease answer the following survey about the new design of the MS 240 course. Please be honest in your answers. All answers to this survey will remain anonymous. Choose the closest answer that matches your thoughts. Personal Information1. I am ❑ Female ❑ Male

 2. My major is

❑ Marketing ❑ Accounting ❑ Entrepreneurial ❑ Economics❑ MIS ❑ Business Administration ❑ Business Undecided ❑ HR❑ Finance ❑ Management ❑ International 

3. My age as of today is ❑ 18 ❑ 19 ❑ 20 ❑ 21 ❑ 22 ❑ >22

Source of Information 4. To gather information for your milestones, what resource did you use the most?

❑ Internet ❑ Library ❑ Text book ❑ Class Lecture/Instructor ❑ Other 

5. To gather information for your milestones, what resource did you use the least?❑ Internet ❑ Library ❑ Text book ❑ Class Lecture/Instructor ❑ Other 

6. How many times did you use the Internet to find information for your milestones this semester?❑ 0-5 ❑ 6-10 ❑ 11-15 ❑ 16-20 ❑ >20 

7. To study for examinations, how helpful were the resources provided on the Instructor’s course website?❑ No Help at All ❑ Not Very Helpful ❑ Somewhat Helpful❑ Very Helpful ❑ Did not use them

Design of Class Days 8. Mondays were lecture days of the text material. In general, for the overall success in learning the course material, I felt those days were

❑ Very Unhelpful ❑ Slightly Unhelpful ❑ Neutral❑ Slightly Helpful ❑ Very Helpful 

9. Wednesdays were group discussion days of the milestones. In general, for the overall success in learning the course material, I felt those days were

❑ Very Unhelpful ❑ Slightly Unhelpful ❑ Neutral❑ Slightly Helpful ❑ Very Helpful 

10. Fridays were lab days of advanced Microsoft Office features. In general, for the overall success in learning the course material, I felt those days were

❑ Very Unhelpful ❑ Slightly Unhelpful ❑ Neutral❑ Slightly Helpful ❑ Very Helpful

Usefulness of Labs

11. Which of the labs did you find the most useful? (Check all that apply)❑ Library Search ❑ Amortization (Excel 1&2) ❑ PowerPoint ❑ Portals❑ Access 1 (Queries) ❑ Access 2 (Reports) ❑ Visual Basic ❑ OLE❑ Access 3 (Wine List)

 

page 19

12. Which of the labs did you find the least useful? (Check all that apply)❑ Library Search ❑ Amortization.(excel 1&2) ❑ PowerPoint ❑ Portals❑ Access 1 (Queries) ❑ Access 2 (Reports) ❑ Visual Basic ❑ OLE❑ Access 3 (Wine List)

Group Project

13. The group project was divided up over 5 milestones. Which milestone was the most beneficial to you?❑ Mile 1 ❑ Mile 2 ❑ Mile 3 ❑ Mile 4 ❑ Mile 5 

14. The group project was divided up over 5 milestones. Which milestone was the least beneficial to you?❑ Mile 1 ❑ Mile 2 ❑ Mile 3 ❑ Mile 4 ❑ Mile 5 

15. The use of a group project to learn the course material was❑ Waste of time ❑ Somewhat distracting ❑ Didn’t help or hurt❑ Somewhat helpful ❑ A great idea 

Overall Feelings

16. I feel that I learned a significant amount about organizational information systems (the title of this course) in the past 16 weeks.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly agree 

17. The amount of work that I put in this course for the knowledge I got in return was❑ Too much work for a small amount of knowledge❑ A good balance of work and knowledge obtained❑ Minimal work for a lot of knowledge 

18. In the course, we spent a fair amount of time talking about the difference between problems, issues and questions as they relate to the analysis of an information system. I found this topic to be

❑ Very Unhelpful ❑ Slightly unhelpful ❑ Neutral❑ Slightly helpful ❑ Very helpful 

Course Objectives 

19. I feel that I can discuss the feasibility of converting a con-computerized system to a computerized system.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly Agree

  20. I feel that I can analyze the steps needed to convert a non-computerized system to a computerized system.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly Agree

 21. I feel that I can now identify the devices that comprise a computer system applicable to Timber Lake Mountain Resort and describe the functions of each.

Strongly disagree❑ Disagree❑ Neutral❑ Agree❑ Strongly ❑Agree

 22. I feel that I can describe and discuss the importance of data as business assets and the need for Information Technology capabilities in businesses.

page 20

Strongly disagree❑ Disagree❑ Neutral❑ Agree❑ ❑ Strongly Agree 

23. I feel that I can describe structured programming such as Visual Basic, and its underlying principles and methods as it pertains to Timber Lake Mountain Resort.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly Agree

 

24. I feel that I could create a technical business information system plan for a small company using a system development life cycle approach.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly Agree

 

25. I feel that I can identify and then design security and privacy issues faced by moving to a computerized system.

❑ Strongly disagree ❑ Disagree ❑ Neutral ❑ Agree ❑ Strongly Agree

 

26. Was there any topic that you had to research on your own for the course that you believe would be beneficial to include as part of the coursework for the whole class? If yes, what is the topic and where would it fit into the coursework?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  27. Please provide any additional comments about any topic concerning this course that you feel strongly about.

The disadvantages of this survey are discussed in the research methodology “limitations” section of this paper.

Problems with the AssessmentAs with any form of assessment, student’s responses can be biased by factors that complicate the measurement process. For instance with the exit surveys, students may like the teacher and respond positively to assessment tools based on this like and not on the evaluation of the process. Or, students may not give accurate feedback (in the general sense) because a survey was given the last segment of the last class day and “getting out of the classroom” superseded accuracy.

The quality of the survey instrument is also important. The implication is that the questions are worded such that they accurately illicit the information; that is, do the questions ask what they were suppose to ask?

Problem ResolutionThe survey could be repeated over several semester time frames since the course is taught every semester. Traditionally, it is meant to be a second semester course so four sections

page 21

are available. On off semesters, one section is offered for those who have conflicting schedules and need this flexibility. Repeating the process each semester would not only support findings of previous semesters but could also identify any trends.

The validity of the test questions could also be statistically analyzed by using statistical measures. Those measures would be resources that I would procure for my dissertation.

Research for this method

“As an assistant professor, one of your major responsibilities will be to develop your research agenda. Your institution has recently made a major commitment to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, and you want to take advantage of some available funding.” (excerpt from the comprehensive exam)

Type of Research

“To that end, identify the type of research methodology and research design that would enable you to accomplish one of the following:

Subject Matter/Instruction

“1. Acquire information that would enhance the content of the educational experience that you have designed. Your research results would be related to the subject matter of the experience.  OR

2. Acquire information that would enhance the teaching and learning in the educational experience that you have designed.  Your research results would be related to the instruction in the experience. “ (excerpt from the comprehensive exam)

Research DesignBased on my earlier work, I wrote the following for my EAF 510 course regarding the results of the survey shown above. The survey had a slightly narrower focus since I was testing the importance of the computer labs and use of technology to the students based on their choice of major.

Abstract

Although much research has accumulated on learning theory, less inquiry has been done on the impact a student’s major may have on satisfaction with course arrangements. Thirty-four male and twelve female college sophomore completed a 27-question survey on using microcomputer labs. Student’s majors were divided into 3 groups on a continuum from a general, theoretical perspective, e.g. economics and international business (Group 1) to an operational, data aware perspective, e.g. accounting and information systems (Group 3). The differences among the majors was significant M(Group 1) = 4.00, M(Group 2) = 3.24, M(Group 3) = 4.11, F(2,42)=2.76, p=.07.

page 22

Utilizing the Scheffé method for post hoc tests, the mean for Group 1 was significantly greater than the mean for Group 3. The conclusion is that students with operational majors were significantly more satisfied than those students having general business majors with using microcomputer labs.

Hypothesis

On the basis of the theoretical literature reviewed, I hypothesized that a student’s major has significant influence on his/her satisfaction with the design of the Information Systems Course, specifically with the third hour component of using laboratory assignments to solve the business problems found in the project.

Participants

The participants were 34 men and 12 women from 19 to 23 years (M = 19.76), undergraduate students at a small, private Midwest university enrolled in an Organizational Information Systems course. The course is required of all business students. The diversity of the students taking the course was not captured in the survey. Students were told that all answers provided would remain anonymous.

Instrument

The survey was written such that students were given finite choices to 25 of the 27 questions and these 25 questions made use of check boxes for students to select their answers. Two external professional reviewers were utilized to verify the validity of the question. A small group of 6 students were utilized to pretest the questionnaire. Although these measures do not compensate for a nationally tested survey, they will help with some degree maintain the validity of the instrument. No surveys were found in the literature review that would be appropriate for use in this study. A copy of the survey is attached to this paper.

Design/Data Collection

A twenty-seven-question survey was administered to students on the last day of class. From this survey, 4 questions will be used for analysis of a paper. Question 2 captures the student’s major and questions 8, 9, and 10 capture whether the students felt that Monday’s lecture (Question 8), Wednesday’s group discussion (Question 9), and/or Fridays microcomputer labs (Question 10) contributed to the overall success of learning the course material. The scale choices are: Very Unhelpful, Slightly Unhelpful, Neutral, Slightly Helpful, and Very Helpful.

Why This Method is AppropriateMethod Discussion

page 23

A One-Way Analysis of Variance was conducted on each of the three questions (8, 9, and 10) against question 2, the student’s major. The major will be grouped into categorical variables so that International Business, Economic, Business Undecided majors will be in group 1; Management, Marketing, Business Administration, Human Resources, Entrepreneurial majors will be in group 2; and Accounting, Finance, Management Information Systems majors will be in group 3. With the 3 one-way ANOVA tests, I will be looking for a test of significance between majors and satisfaction with the design of the class days.

Results

A one-way analysis of variance was performed in order to determine the differences among the majors relative to the student’s satisfaction of labs contributing towards learning the course material. Group 1 consisted of International Business, Economic, and Business Undecided majors. Group 2 consisted of Management, Marketing, Business Administration, Human Resources, and Entrepreneurial majors. Group 3 consisted of Accounting, Finance, and Management Information Systems (MIS) majors. The statistic that pertained to the differences among the majors was significant M(Group 1) = 4.00, M(Group 2) = 3.24, M(Group 3) = 4.11, F(2,42)=2.76, p=.07. Utilizing the Scheffé method for post hoc tests, the mean for Group 1 was significantly greater than the mean for Group 3.

These results showed that students in the abstract random continuum (Group 1) performed the poorest of all the other groups and students (Group 3) in the sequential continuum (concrete sequential and abstract sequential) performed the best.

The analysis is that these students in Group 3 “tend to prefer working with computers because the computer is seen as an extension of the sequential person’s mind”15. In the recommendations of the Ross, et. Al. study, they suggest the need for educators to identify the different learning styles of the students and offer alternatives to the sequential learning such as style stretching, a term Gregorc used in 1982 to “refer to the ability of person to learn to operate within an unnatural learning style mode to complete a designated task”16.

Advantages and Disadvantages Limitations

There were many limitations to this study. First, the n of the sample size was small and the n of each major was therefore even smaller. To allow for some statistical leeway, an alpha of .10 was used. A second major issue was that the sample was not random. The students in the study were those that had signed up for the Management Information

15 Ross, J. L., Drysdale, M. T. B., & Schulz, R. A. (2001, Summer). Cognitive Learning Styles and Academic Performance in Two Postsecondary Computer Application Courses, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 400-412.

16 Gregorc, A. (1982), An Adults Guide to Style, Columbia, CT: Gregorc Associates, Inc.

page 24

Systems 240 course. A follow up study can be done over the following semesters to increase the survey size to over 200 and the data then can be reanalyzed.

If significance is found in the larger study, then instructors may want to use this data to consider how they teach courses. For instance, we teach students in microcomputer labs how to gather information and do number crunching techniques so that they can then rearrange data into meaningful information. The model of “Data --> Information” is one of the first lessons in an Information Systems course. Data aware students, such as accounting and management information students (MIS) students, excel at creating graphs and charts, manipulating the data into multiple scenarios, and develop certain “playfulness”, or cognitive spontaneity, with the computer.

Students at the other end of the continuum, such as economics and international business students are looking at the big picture and are usually not interested in how numbers are created. These students typically state that they will rely on software programs to generate information for them or will utilize personnel to generate information when the need arises. With this study, we may be able to answer a small piece of the educational puzzle: does the student’s major does make a difference on student satisfaction in the use of labs. A case could then be made that satisfaction leads to learning and a question for instructors is whether or not the use of their labs is flexible enough not only for student’s learning styles but also for the student’s majors. One approach: could instructors make use of this finding to make changes in their lab design such as having data aware majors do the number crunching part of the project and have the theoretical majors interpret the information all embodied in the learning of organizational information systems?

Side NoteAll research done should be in line with the international standards set by the AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business). Part of my dissertation work will be to incorporate these standards.

Comprehensive Exam Criteria

Evidence/Provide Evidence and ArgumentationIn addition to the already sited materials, I would like to include additional items of research. Because the articles are relevant to both papers, I will include them in the concentration question and not duplicate them here. Please refer to the corresponding section in the other paper.

Documented Support The citation to Stanta Clara County Office of Education, http://etc.sccoe.k12.ca.us/i2000/00mod/b_projects/learner.html is no longer a working site. The SCCOE page still exists but apparently this particular project page was deleted. Due to the time constraints, I have not been able to find another citation for Mitchell Resnick’s quote. I also did not adhere to a specific style, such as APA or MLA due to the time constraints involved with looking up the proper citation format. My intent is to write a program in Visual Basic during my dissertation process (summer project) that will

page 25

convert the citation into the proper format. I apologize for any inconvenience to the reader.

Justify Significant Ethical Issues(Duplicated in both papers for the comprehensive examination.)The topic of justification for this paper begins with our institutions that teach courses in such a manner as to reach masses and attempts to bring student knowledge to a minimum level. We have discussed in our doctoral classrooms that this effect is what the outcome has been for the “No Child Left Behind ” initiative happening in our primary education. We teach and then gather feedback that literally tells us, just like the thermostat on the wall, if something is wrong. We then try to correct the situation so that each and every student is robotized into the presumed correct learner.

In a conversation with Dr. Rariden, the Director of the Extended University and instructor of the Artificial Intelligence courses in the School of Information Technology at Illinois State University, we discussed the moral implications of how we teach the students in our area17. Notes from our discussion follow:

Flunk out rate for the beginning levels courses (ITK 168 and 169) is 45%; Instruction of 168 treats all majors the same. We have 3 majors - Computer Science programming, Information Systems, and Telecommunications. Each major has different learning styles from programmers (detailed oriented) to telecommunications (“big picture” oriented).

Resource allocation: The number of faculty will be affected since there is not enough critical mass to support each area. Number of students enrolled in the program has dropped form 1000 to 250. Need 400 for viable program. Department will probably be dissolved. BIS (business school) program sucking up all our majors. University has allowed duplication of effort.

Attracting new faculty to provide quality teaching to the students will not be possible.

High School ACT scores use to be lower and demanded more of students-think of PL/1 and mainframe work which took tremendous number of hours to complete the programming homework. There is a lack of student dedication. Generation X is different than the previous generations. They require immediacy. Social trend have changed with Internet, cell phones, etc.

The standardization has moral implications that we are not allowing the individual to develop his/her potential. Each person is an individual with differing sets of values and experiences.

Human Resource departments of businesses in the real world are reporting back that if students have the answer already (I.e., they know the answer) they can do the work but if they don't have the answer, they can't “dig it out”.

17 Notes from conversation with Dr. Rariden, May 2, 2005.

page 26

When Dr. Rariden taught philosophy, the role of the professor was not to answer any questions but to ask more questions instead.  When teaching information systems courses, we give the students all the answers.  Students aren't able to find their own solutions to problems which translate into flunk out rates.

We have become programmers of students, not teachers of students.  We teach by giving all the answers; therefore, no problem solving skills are developed.

Students treat school as a jail sentence; do the time, come out with an A. They master 3-4 programs and not a set of concepts. They write the code to

complete the assigned programs but can’t apply the code to other examples. The moral justification is that we should not treat them like robots; we should be

treating them like humans. By treating them like humans, we are giving them the skills to live fulfilling lives.

(“True learning empowers students to challenge oppression in their lives"18.)

Conclusion and Final ThoughtsThe teaching of students in today’s world has become so significantly different and is oftentimes frustrating and seemingly pointless. I have struggled with the concept that I have just become my parents and that I now have to bear the generational burden between teaching and student learning.

A more practical approach is to acknowledge that times have change and view the frustration as nature’s way of saying that educational change is in order. The need for change therefore creates new opportunities and new challenges. The proverbial glass is half full and not half empty. At this point in time, for me, the glass has four ounces in it.

Link to Comprehensive exam question – Program Core

18 Weimer, Maryellen. “Learner-Centered Teaching - Five Key Changes to Practice”Jossey-Bass Publishers. p. 8.

page 27

Index

AAACSB......................................................................25Abstract......................................................................22Access to Technology..................................................9Autonomous Self-Regulating Learners.......................8

BBalance of Power.........................................................6

CConstructivism.............................................................6Course Objectives......................................................16

DDesign/Data Collection, (EAF 510 Paper)................23Distance Education....................................................14Diversity of Learning.................................................14DreamweaverMX......................................................15

EEmpowering the Student..............................................7Empowerment..............................................................4Engaged Learning........................................................6Evaluation Purpose and Processes...............................8Expeditionary Learning...............................................6

FFunction of Content.....................................................7

HHypothesis, (EAF 510 Paper)....................................22

IInstrument, (EAF 510 Paper).....................................23ITK 352......................................................................14

LLanger, Ellen J.............................................................5Limitation (EAF 510 paper)......................................24

MMethod Discussion, (EAF 510 Paper).......................23Millikin's Mission......................................................12Mindful Learning.........................................................5MS 240 (Course)..........................................................2

MS 240 Survey..........................................................18Multimedia Course....................................................14

NNo Child Left Behind................................................25Normative Conception of Teaching...........................13

PPassive Learners..........................................................2Pettit, Pat......................................................................9Planning for Learning and Assessment.....................18Political Perspectives...................................................7Project-Based Learning...............................................6Pyramid......................................................................13

RRelationship Between Curriculum and Instruction....13Responsibility for Learning.........................................8Results (EAF 510 paper)...........................................23Role of the Teacher......................................................7

SScheffé Method for Post Hoc Tests...........................24Self Efficacy................................................................6Semiotic Series............................................................3System Development Life Cycle...............................17

TTechnology Acceptance Model.................................11Toll, Dr. Cathy.............................................................7Troxel, Dr. Wendy.....................................................17

VValidation....................................................................8

page 28

page 29