Contextualizing Online Assignments:
“Spoon-Feeding” or Best Practice?
Michael Cenkner, M.Ed.Athabasca University
Presentation Outline
Introduction • Terms - What does “contextualize assignments” mean?• Why we aren't doing it• Why we should do it
Thoughts on how to contextualize assignments• Ideas on how to approach it conceptually • Ideas on how to format
Conclusion
References
What does “contextualize assignments” mean?
Telling students “why” they are doing a given assignment
Bringing awareness to the several dimensions to this
Separating the “how to” from the “why”
Terms
“Contextualize“ - situating
“Explicit contextualization” – distinct from “how to”
“Assignment” - a learning task
“Content domain-centered ” vs. “learning-centered” – focus is the learning experience
Limits of presentation
Not talking about rubrics (marking guides) - necessary but not sufficient
Not talking about feedback – actually this contextualization is part of feedback
Example
(To Marking Guide…)
Currently...
Explicit contextualization often not happening
• Absent • Buried
“Fallacy of obviousness” vs. learner diversity
At the same time the diversity of students has increased enormously so that previous assumptions of the level of sophistication of knowledge background, study skills, conception of learning (Saljo, 1982) or conception of knowledge (Perry, 1970) of students are now likely to be very wide of the mark.
Gibbs and Simpson, Does your assessment support your students’ learning?
“Fallacy of obviousness” vs. levels of awareness
Conception of the task• Conception of learning• Conception of knowledge• Conception of the discipline
Gibbs and Simpson, Does your assessment support your students’ learning?
“Fallacy of obviousness” vs. complexities of environment
Difficulties related to online strategies
Difficulties related to online affordances
Other reasons
Fallacy of “benefits of vagueness”• “Supporting creativity” vs. need to know the real goal• “Supporting initiative” vs. need to know real boundaries
Power and control• Conceptual development” vs. “rite of passage”?• “It was good enough for me…”
Lack of knowledge about integrated unit planning among faculty; lack of incentives
Why we should contextualize assignments
To motivate • Relevance; competence
To remind• Cognitive - activating prior learning
To make responsible• Metacognition – activating learning strategies; learner control
To guide• Teaching - relates to summarizing, setting objectives, and cuing
To explain• Concept formation – “why” and “how to” are different kinds of concepts
Some good reasons why students do assignmentsTo apply theoretical/conceptual knowledge in an accurate way
To practice a (conceptual) skill, procedure or algorithm
To apply domain thinking and terminology in an appropriate way
To help prepare for an exam
To be successful early on in the course
To apply explicit or implicit learning strategies
To benefit from a synergy (e.g. design a solution to a problem)
To consolidate/synthesize understanding
Example
Example
Example
(To Marking Guide…)
Some integrated unit development models
“Learning-centred” vs. “content domain-centred”
Both in K-12 and corporate but also post-secondary
“Integrated” means an entire learning experience is provided
Understanding by Design (UbD)
Unit Planning Approach
Dimensions of understanding
“Backwards approach” - Starts with questions about assessment: o What do practitioners do?o What is evidence of them doing it?o What would assessment from there look like?o What activities would prepare students for that assessment?o What content would prepare students for that assessment?
The “why we are doing this” is integrated throughout
http://www.ubdexchange.org/
“4MAT” Unit Planning Approach
online.sfsu.edu/.../deborah/4mat.htm
Summary
The contextualization of assignments is crucial to learning
The contextualization should minimally be:o Explicito Multi-dimensional o Separate from instructionso Formatted differently from instructions
Some ideas on formatting
Some pointers to integrated unit planning models
ReferencesBillett, S. (2001). Workplaces, communities and pedagogy: an activity theory view. In M.R. Lea &
Kathy Nicoll (Eds.), In Distributed Learning: Social and cultural approaches to practice (1st ed., pp. (pp.83-97).). New York: Taylor & Francis (Routledge).
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Does your assessment support your students’ learning? Journal of Learning and teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 1.
Marzano, R., & Pickering, D. (2001). Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement (ASCD). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervisions and Curriculum Development.
Moses, A. (n.d.). Building on Prior Knowledge and Meaningful Student Contexts/Cultures. Critical Issue: Building on Prior Knowledge and Meaningful Student Contexts/Cultures . Retrieved March 17, 2009, from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr100.htm.
Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies and beyond: A look at strategies in the context of styles. In S.S. Magnan (Ed.), In Shifting the instructional focus to the learner (pp. 35-55). Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Reflective baby. (n.d.). . Retrieved March 23, 2009, from http://mopslik.ca/photos/Gabriella/gabby12.jpg.
Sambell, K., McDowell, L., & Brown, S. (1997). "But Is It Fair?" : An Exploratory Study Of Student Perceptions Of The Consequential Validity Of Assessment. Studies In Educational Evaluation, Volume 23, Pages 349-371.
Spoon feeding Image. (n.d.). . Retrieved March 23, 2009, from http://www.flickr.com/photos/60546721@N00/73410200/.
Understanding by Design Exchange by ASCD. (n.d.). . Retrieved March 23, 2009, from http://www.ubdexchange.org/.
Waite, T. (n.d.). Activity Theory. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/faculty/yrogers/act_theory2/.
Welcome to 4MAT: A New Way of Thinking About Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). . Retrieved March 23, 2009, from http://www.aboutlearning.com/.