1 / 31

Automated feedback of Learning Styles. Is it just a horoscope?

Automated feedback of Learning Styles. Is it just a horoscope?. Dr. Delia Wakelin Northumbria University Dr C Smith Dr A Porter Dr C Colbourn Dr H Dudiak R Lever. Psychology Learning & Teaching 2006 Conference. Cognitive Learning Strategies in Students.

merlin
Download Presentation

Automated feedback of Learning Styles. Is it just a horoscope?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Automated feedback of Learning Styles. Is it just a horoscope? Dr. Delia Wakelin Northumbria University Dr C Smith Dr A Porter Dr C Colbourn Dr H Dudiak R Lever Psychology Learning & Teaching 2006 Conference

  2. Cognitive Learning Strategies in Students • Interested in flexible learners who need to cope with many ways of instruction, assessment and learning • How can we encourage students to explore? • Two stages • Measure student strategies (styles) • Encourage and enhance students

  3. Cognitive Learning Strategies in Students • Reviewed then administered many measures • Students filled in the questionnaire, and we soon decided to do this on the internet. • Students were given feedback • The value of this exercise was then determined.

  4. Learning Strategies • Four measures were used. • Curriculum Questionnaire • LSQ (Mental/Behavioural/Self Regulation) • ASSIST (Deep/Strategic/Surface) • VARK (visual/auditory/read-write/kinaesthetic) • [olfactory]

  5. Automation • Found a fair degree of overlap in feedback • Decided to try to automate the procedure by using what was essentially ‘a production system • Sequence of ‘IF THEN’ combinations • With rules relating to scores

  6. Automation - original

  7. Automation - original

  8. Automation - original

  9. Automation - original

  10. Automation – old – guidance offered

  11. Automation – old – guidance offered

  12. Automation - new

  13. Automation - new

  14. Automation - new

  15. Automation - new

  16. Automation - enhancement Becoming deeper

  17. Automation - enhancement Time management

  18. Correlations - measures and assessments • Lsq - poor correlations • Assist - only negative correlations with surface • Some low correlations with vark totals • First year marks highly correlated • Correlations reasonable with curriculum questionnaire

  19. Using feedback • Can ask students to explore • However too much information • Can hope recommendations will focus • Not sure it will • Can run a guidance tutorial • More chance of working

  20. Changing students • We should liken change for students in the same was as in therapy • How can change occur in therapy? • Challenging beliefs • We have achieved first step of providing a way of externalising the beliefs about learning and assessment xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx With students

  21. Methods for changing students • Make more use of CBT strategies • E.g black and white thinking, focussing on negative, poor beliefs about others • Have we got time • Enhancement module provides the tools, but need a better way of using it.

  22. Cognitive consistency • Some criticisms of CBT • Doesn’t explain why people are resistant to change • Students are also resistant to change • Leahy 2002

  23. Cognitive consistency • Leahy 2002 • Characteristic of depression is the apparent low motivation, low energy, indecisiveness and self-criticism that constitute a core of resistance to change • Characteristic of weaker students is the apparent low motivation, low energy, indecisiveness and self-criticism that constitute a core of resistance to change

  24. Investment model • Individuals make decisions about how to allocate their resources based on their estimate of present and future resources available, tolerance for risk, and probability and value of gains and losses. • Depressed individuals (poor strategy students) resist change, and hesitate in making decisions

  25. paradox • Some students don’t seem motivated to pursue reward • Decisions seem to be based on ‘expectations of future outcome and have strategies to avoid loss and inhibit risk.’ • Strategy is not a bias but an adaptation • Poor learners believe to abandon learning strategy will enhance loss

  26. How can I lose? • Cost is the default • Prevarication and waiting adopted • Under stress students will fall back on their ‘safe’ approaches • Need to give more opportunity to explore other methods in safe environment • Need more focus on these issues in course • Once a semester isn’t enough

  27. Changing students • Looks as if the problem is unattainable given the constraints of time - staff and student - maintaining interest • The guidance program is going to be critical in relation to validity of CLaSS • But students do change - whatever we were doing in the course had some influence

  28. questions • How should students use the resource? • How should guidance sessions work? • Do we need a protocol? • Do staff need to be trained? • Do we have to include more innovations in our syllabi? • Do students need to be trained? • Do we need to measure some motivational/emotional factors?

  29. Thanks for contributions • HEFCE • Dr Chris Smith - CLaSS director; Dr Helen Whiteley • Rachel Lever – CLaSS manager • Colleagues in Partner Institutions • Students at Northumbria University

  30. Critique from F. Coffied • Practice of identifying students learning style and tailoring teaching methods to student needs should be abandoned • Diagnosis of verbalisers, visualisers etc and subsequent teaching is invalid. • 13 methods examined only Entwistle and Vermont models of any value

  31. Critique from F. Coffied 2 • Learning style implied fixed preference which took no account of student experiences or environment • Our study takes the situation from the other direction. If style doesn’t work, can students recognise it, and adapt

More Related