The idea for this project came from one that is used by Dr. Diane Schallert of the Educational Psychology department and is similar to the one she uses for inside the department graduate students. So my thanks to her for allowing me to use it, too.

The purpose of this project is to do a careful observation and analysis of the complexities involved in either learning or teaching. For the final report you will provide:

a. a description of the target behavior that was learned/taught

b. the initial plan for learning/teaching

c. a chronology of the learning/teaching experience that includes observations

of what took place and your theories about why you tried what you did

and why what you observed occurred. You should draw on the theories

we are reading and discussing in class for your theoretical analysis.

d. a final analysis of the real sequence of events and how the experience

illustrates or fails to conform to what we have learned about learning

Here are some general guidelines to follow in accomplishing this task:

1. Choose an appropriate learning situation. You can choose to be either the learner or the teacher, but it is easier to be the learner so you can report on the emotions, thoughts and private learning strategies of the learner. If you're the teacher, you'll have to figure out a way of getting these from the learner.

Bring a one page proposal for your learning/teaching project to class on Sept. 24. In it you should include the task description, the target behaviors to be learned and whether you will be the teacher or the learner. You should also lay out an initial learning plan (not too much detail). I'll group people according to the kind of learning you've chosen to pursue and whether you're the teacher or the learner. From then on, you'll meet with that group for a short update periodically to share observations, ideas, successes and failures.

It's also a good idea to pick a learning task that is early in the sequence of learning so that you can really see some progress in the short time we have. That's also when the most errors are likely to occur.

2. Keep a learning log in which you record what you expected to happen, what you planned to do, what really happened, how you felt about it, what your speculations on why you did or did not make progress are. Keeping this current will help you reconstruct the learning sequence later when you're writing the final report. The log will also form the basis for the inclass discussions you'll have every other week with people pursuing a similar type of learning/teaching task. I may occasionally ask for a brief update on how the project is going. You can fulfill this request by giving me copies of your log entries without any further explanation.

3. Report your observations in the final report described above. Your first draft of the report should be ready by Nov. 12th, if you want early feedback. The final project is due Dec. 3.

The purpose of this project is to do a careful observation and analysis of the complexities involved in either learning or teaching. For the final report you will provide:

a. a description of the target behavior that was learned/taught (1 page)

b. the initial plan for learning/teaching (1-2 pages)

c. a chronology of the learning/teaching experience that includes observations

of what took place and your theories about why you tried what you did

and why what you observed occurred. Quote from your learning logs

to support your observations and analysis. You should draw on the

theories we have read and discussed in class for your theoretical analysis.

(5-6 pages)

d. a final analysis of the real sequence of events and how the experience

illustrates or fails to conform to what we have learned about learning

plus some speculation on the relevance of what you have learned in

the process for your own work as a teacher or instructional designer

(5-6 pages)

Note that the length of this paper is on the outside 15 pages. That is an estimate, but is probably pretty close. At least the emphasis should be placed on what happened and what you make of it.

e. please turn in your learning logs along with the paper so that I can make a

determination for myself of what happened. They don't have to be

prettied up; I will settle for the raw data.

Target behavior - 3 points total

3 behavior is described in detail and in operational, concrete terms; reasons are given for the selection.


2 behavior is described in general terms, but still recognizable


1 behavior is described in vague generalities


0 behavior is not described or is wrong

Initial plan - 3 points total

3 initial plan described with accompanying justification for selected strategies


2 initial plan described, but no justification given


1 plan discussed only in general terms


0 plan description wrong or absent

Learning logs - 3 points total

3 complete learning logs included along with some initial analysis imbedded; appropriate sample support materials included; dated and obviously generated near in time to events described


2 orderly learning logs included without much imbedded analysis, but descriptive of process and products


1 learning logs included, but sketchy or done post hoc, unclear descriptions


0 learning logs not included

Chronology and analysis - 13 points total

chronology

5 accurate narrative version of learning logs that follows a logical organization. descriptions match log entries but include more connective tissue and some analysis that connects narrative to course content. Evidence of reflection on learning process present in self-referrent statements and connections made are insightful


4 above without as much interconnection between points, fewer insights


3 above with no interconnections or insights but still with reflection


2 narrative only


1 narrative doesn't track learning logs


0 no narrative

analysis

8 accurate comments about possible connections between learning events and between events and theories/research studied in classl; analysis goes beyond obvious connections and includes original insights.


6 above but with more obvious and mundane connections, less original insight


4 less analysis in terms of quantity as well as quality; only 1/2 the possible connections made


2 analysis given is superficial or incorrect or misleading, but attempt to go beyond facts has been made


0 incorrect analysis; no analysis

Final analysis - 16 points total

accuracy

2 analyses offered are based on correct interpretation of events


1 most analyses are correct


0 most analyses are incorrect or missing

depth of discussion

3 analyses offered go far beyond obvious connections to theory and offer some original insights into causal factors, theoretical links, inconsistencies, judgments


2 as above without original insights, analyses deal mostly with surface features


1 only minimal attempts at indepth analysis or incorrect analyses


0 no analyses; major errors in judgment

quality

4 complete, coherent, insightful, connected internally


3 complete, coherent, connected


2 starting to lose cohesiveness


1 disconnected, disjointed


0 uninterpretable

insights

7 multiple original insights into causes of observations are offered; insights are soundly derived from data and theory


5 some original insights; some "borrowed" insights


3 only a few insights are present and those that are made are mundane or inaccurate or naive


1 insights present but sparse, shallow or inaccurate


0 none offered

Presentation - 2 points total

Return to Course Materials for 380G