TAKING THE HELM: TARGETING STUDENT LEARNING

prepared for the Speech Communication Association

National Conference 1996

Bobbie Rickner Klopp Kirkwood Community College

TAKING THE HELM: TARGETING STUDENT LEARNING

The theme for the 1996 Speech Communication Association's national conference is "Taking the Helm." This phrase lends itself to many interpretations, some of which may be in conflict with each other. For example, a proponent of the teacher-centered classroom might interpret it to mean that, as the locus of power, the teacher must control both the course's content and the students' access to and interpretation of that content. On the other hand, to a proponent of the student­centered classroom, "taking the helm" might mean that students take ownership of their learning, in both content and process, relegating the teacher to resource rather than source. At Kirkwood Community College, we are exploring the latter approach. We have begun a three-year faculty project to improve "the quality of student learning through the design and implementation of a process learning training program" (Kirkwood Process Learning Mission Statement, 1996). The goal of the Process Learning Project is to train teachers in active learning techniques and continuous assessment techniques. This calls for teachers in the project to shift their traditional position in the classroom from sole locus of control to shared locus of control with the students and calls for students to shift from passive acceptor to active investigator of content and process. This shift can best be captured by the change from "sage on the stage" to "guide on the side."

The term "process learning" comes from "process education", a term trademarked by Pacific Crest Software, a software and educational consultant company which specializes in training college faculty in process education teaching. As described in Foundations of Learning, process education:

encompasses the philosophy that learning, thinking, problem solving, communicating, assessing, and teamwork are processes to be developed and continually improved upon by students as they construct knowledge. Process Education incorporates cooperative learning, guided discovery activities, journal writing, and various assessment tools (Krumsieg & Baehr, 1996).

Notice the phrase "as they construct knowledge". The theoretical goal of process education is for teachers to teach students how to teach themselves. The Kirkwood Process Learning Project embraces that philosophy and augments active learning activities with the use of • common vocabulary for assessment of learning • continuous self-assessment (both student and teacher) and peer assessment • continuous improvement in faculty design of critical thinking and problem-solving

skills • formation of and participation in faculty peer-coaching teams and classroom

observations.

1

Even though there are diverse facets to Kirkwood's Process Learning Project each element works towards the cognitive and behavioral development of the individual learner.

One image that comes to mind for this project is that of a series of rings, each larger ring enveloping the next smaller ring like a Venn diagram or a target. Each circle represents the communication scope of a specific part of the project. This "target" has four concentric circles. The first and largest circle is teacher-to-teacher communication. It holds the second circle, teacher-to-student communication. The third circle is student-to-student communication; it holds the fourth and smallest circle, but ultimately the most lasting circle, student-to-self communication. The Process Learning Project hits every level of our target, working from the largest circle in to the smallest.

Teacher-to-Teacher Communication

Many faculty across the country are currently thinking about "transformative" communication. At Kirkwood, we believe that transformative communication must first take root outside the classroom, in the mind and environment of the teacher, in order for change to be embedded throughout the institution. Therefore, our starting circle in the target is teacher-to-teacher communication. This is our largest circle because it surrounds all of our teachers by means of a campus-wide project. We have thirty teachers for the first year of our project with two more years funded for additional faculty. Hundreds of Kirkwood students will eventually be affected, in varying degrees, by the project's philosophy, goals and techniques. But why do we have a project at all when any teacher is free to change the way s/he teaches? Two words can answer this: communication and support.

Our project provides the structure for productive, regular and concrete communication about (1) implementation of cooperative learning, (2) methods for resolving common problems teachers encounter when using groups and problem­solving rather than lecture, and (3) peer coaching of faculty by faculty in the classroom itself for individualized and focused observations. The practical problem facing many of us who are seeking to change the classroom environment is how to d.Q critical pedagogy. For that we need a forum for sharing ideas, the tools to hone skills we already have, and opportunities to develop new skills. All faculty involved in the project participated in the 1996 April or July Process Education Teaching Institutes conducted by Pacific Crest. At the beginning of the fall semester, 1996, they also attended a half-day workshop conducted by Kirkwood faculty which familiarized them with the project, facilitated the formation of peer-coaching teams and began work on each faculty member's initial process learning activity. Each project member is given eight days of released time to work on the project in large and small teams. Four of these days we have set aside for project members to work together and address common concerns stemming from our individual experiences. The morning of each day is spent in discussion groups, first breaking into small groups with discussion of issues and concerns then regrouping for large group

2

sharing of ideas that may help resolve those issues. The afternoon is spent working in peer-coaching teams on the team members' implementation of their next process learning activity. Each day ends with product (recorder) and process (reflector) reports on the type and quality of the work accomplished that day. The other four days of released time are spent as each peer-coaching team deems most productive in accomplishing their process learning goals. In addition to these eight days of working together, the project also provides four "consultation days" which will be spent with process education consultants in individual or small-group consultations.

The signature aspect of our project is the peer coaching. Many of us have talked around the coffee pot about "new" methodology, "new" attitudes and approaches to the relationship between teacher and learner. But few of us open our classrooms to our peers for observation, mutual reflection and dialogue. Faculty in the project have formed peer coaching teams, three to four teachers per team, whose task is to provide support and feedback on lesson designs during workdays, explore issues of process learning together, and conduct at least two classroom observations of each member during the semester. The observer and teacher agree on the focus for the day's observation and the teacher identifies the goals of the lesson and other information pertinent to the observation. Both team members also agree on the questions which the observer will answer during the observation. After the class ends, both share their perceptions of what happened during class. The discussion's primary goal is to give useful, specific, non-judgmental feedback to the observed teacher and provide an opportunity for both teachers to share insights gained from the experience. Teams consist of faculty from different disciplines rather than the same disciplines in order for fresh perspectives to be gained for both members of the observation experience. Although this kind cross-disciplinary communication is rare it is much like what we expect of our students who come into our classrooms from diverse and unfamiliar backgrounds. At Kirkwood, we have seen those faculty learning communities which cross the boundaries of discipline and department result in the most revitalizing experiences and promote creativity and experimentation in our pedagogical practices.

All of the above structural components of the project are ultimately designed to support our project members as they seek to change their teaching methodology in fundamental ways. Most of the project members are risking a great deal. It is a risk to change the way we teach because that implies that how we have taught in the past needs to be changed for some reason. That, in turn, challenges the worth of many years, even decades, of teaching practices. It also challenges our need for control. Going from a teacher-centered classroom to a student-centered classroom means sharing the "power", sometimes even giving over the power almost completely (as in collaborative learning), and we may be very uncomfortable about losing that control. By providing our project teachers with opportunities for reflection and assessment of their work and by meeting with other teachers undergoing the same challenges and risks, we establish a support system that is essentially a "teaching circle". We already have a model for this on our campus in a successful Classroom Assessment Techniques Project which trains faculty in the use of Pat

3

Cross' and Tom Angelo's "CATs". These are quick, simple methods of getting productive student feedback-formative assessment- in order for the teacher to intervene before an evaluation-summative assessment-is required. (Cross/Angelo, 1993) The CATs project is centered on the teaching circle, the regular small-group discussion of teaching by teachers. The Process Learning Project moves from the informal setting of the CATs Project teaching circle to the more formal and public classroom observation with its increased level of personal risk and vulnerability that comes with opening the door to your classroom. It also moves from the sirilply­structured, sometimes spontaneous and usually anonymous CAT to a carefully designed inquiry (or lesson) plan. -

In both projects, an integral component without which the project itself would never succeed is the time spent with other teachers. No change for the better can become permanent if the teacher doing the change has no support from some source. For many, that support comes through the positive response of our students (and rare administrators) and thank heavens for that! But when an institution seeks more pervasive and permanent change, the faculty must have support from each other. Whether the teaching circle is face-to-face or e-mail-to-e-mail, in one-on-one classroom observation or small group discussion, teaching professionals need the stimulation of lively discourse with their peers. Administrators can facilitate such support by providing the time and means for the mutual sharing of experiences and ideas. Without "time and means", widespread and effective change can only be a hit-or-miss matter. The Process Learning Project provides those necessary resources for the collegial support essential to our first circle of the target, teacher-to­teacher communication.

Teacher-to-Student Communication

The second circle in our target is teacher-to-student communication. Once teachers have support from their peers and a means by which regular communication about mutual endeavors can occur, it is time to take to the classroom. What do we take? We have many names for it: process learning, cooperative learning, democratic learning, strategic learning, participatory learning, dialogical learning and so forth. No matter what the name, the teacher is responsible for setting up the circumstances by which "it" can occur, for creating a climate whereby "it" can flourish and, ultimately, establishing a means by which "it" can be assessed.

The change here at Kirkwood began, as I mentioned earlier, with Cross/Angelo's classroom assessments, which seek to get at what is going on in the minds of the learner before, during or after cognitive activity. Building upon this is process learning which seeks to get at how learners learn and to develop their ability to learn even more effectively. A great debt of gratitude goes to the work of Jim Cooper, David and Roger Johnson, Susan Prescott, Spencer Kagan, and so many others who have worked long and productively in cooperative learning research. Techniques such as the jigsaw and its variations, case studies, critical questioning,

4

structured controversy, guided critical questions, group portfolios and projects. are wonderful activities for learning. For more ideas and activities, an excellent source is Cooperative Learning & College Teaching, a newsletter edited by Jim Cooper and published by the Network for Cooperative Learning in Higher Education. Many excellent books describing cooperative learning activities are also available. For the latest in case study development and usage Pat Hutchings, the director of the American Association for Higher Education Teaching Initiative, is an invaluable resource.

Cooperative and collaborative learning methods enhance learners' acquisition of knowledge and development of critical thinking, provide a forum for the practice of oral expression of opinion, speed the development of empathetic and critical listening, move the learner from performance for external rewards to performance for internal rewards, establish equitable standards of performance, and lead to the learner's acceptance of self-efficacy. Process learning incorporates all these objectives while continually emphasizing the role of students as the primary agents in their discovery of knowledge. The teacher diminishes as static content master and assumes the function of real-time process assessor. To do this the process learning class has four basic characteristics: • the use of teams with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. • the design of the plan by which knowledge and skills are to be acquired and

critical thinking practiced. • the selection of means by which assessment will be conducted. • the development of teacher as "constructive interventionist".

A typical process learning base group will have four roles: (1) a captain (sometimes called team leader), (2) a recorder, (3) a spokesperson and (4) a reflector (see Appendix A). The captain's job is to make sure that the task is accomplished effectively and efficiently, that everyone in the group has learned the material, is performing her/his role, and is actively involved in a positive way. The recorder records the discussion highlights, responses to critical thinking questions that are a part of each activity and any decisions or conclusions the group reaches (see Appendix B). These must be recorded succinctly and cogently as the spokesperson's task is to represent the group to the rest of the class, usually through an oral report based on the recorder's information. The reflector's task is to observe the group as it works and, at the end of the work session, reflect on the group's strengths, areas for improvement and generate insights about learning processes or about the content under study for that day (see Appendix C). All members have equal responsibility for participation and productivity. A fifth role, that of technology specialist, may be added in a situation using technology, such as a computer or tool utilization. In a group of four, this fifth role may be performed by the recorder or spokesperson. For groups of more than five other roles can be added such, as the formal roles of planner, time manager, conflict manager, and evaluator/critic. You may be familiar with all of these roles under different titles as they fall very clearly into the traditional roles of a group. The differences with Process Learning are that groups of four are almost always the norm, the base group roles always remain

5

consistent, and each person is held accountable via assessment for the performance of his/her role.

The second component that governs a process learning activity is the construction of the activity itself. Since the teacher is no longer the source of all knowledge, the activity plan must be very clear and provide the resources the students need to discover the necessary knowledge and accomplish the task. A typical process learning activity template will consist of the following parts (Krumsieg and Baehr, 1997): component

the purpose orientation

prerequisites

learning objectives criteria

glossary of key terms resources

plan

models critical thinking

skill exercises

problem-solving

self-assessment research

function

explain and identify the reason for learning orient the student by giving a systematic overview of what

is to be learned identify skills/knowledge needed to accomplish this task

(this can be an excellent place for building continuity between previous methods and content)

appropriate goals related to the learning activity standards for assessment of outcomes and measurement of performance either process learning terms or content terms necessary or useful materials or people for the learning

activity a plan of action to meet the criteria; may correspond to what many would call the "activity" of the day/week examples which assist the learner through modeling questions for comprehension, analysis, synthesis, application and evaluation to be done outside of class for skill building and applying

knowledge and problem solving in new situations. real-world problems that require synthesis of knowledge,

methodology and application to check knowledge or skills mastery create and develop new information

The activity can be easily adapted from collaborative or cooperative activities or case studies that many of us already use in our classes. As you can see, the process learning lesson plan has criteria for outcomes measurement, critical thinking and self-assessment embedded in its structure. The roles establish consistent responsibilities and clear expectations for student performance while the design provides the resources, models and guidance that are the responsibility of any teacher.

Once the teacher has designed the activity plan and given it to the class, the groups will assign roles (usually rotating them so everyone practices each role) and begin work on the activity. In addition to time for working on the task in the

6

cooperative group, time to process the activity as a whole must also be allotted. It is in this time slot that the spokespeople will orally report their group's work and conclusions. This is the point where the content of the course is processed by the whole class, bringing to the large group the small groups' conclusions, evidence and support. This may be in the same class period as the task or, if the task takes several days, the report may be after the task is completed in its entirety. After the class period or activity is completed and the recorder's report has been given by the spokesperson, the reflector will present the reflector's report for that day.

Unlike other systems, process learning prioritizes reflection by giving it a separate role where one person is responsible for insuring that reflection and its resultant product, assessment, occur. This is the third characteristic of all process learning classes and can be present in many forms. One of the simplest and most widely used is the S I I. This is a short, quick assessment which uses the following format: strengths (and why they are strengths), areas for improvement (and what can be done to improve this area) and insights (and what the significance of the insight is for the rest of the class). As these assessments are truly the culmination of the class it is crucial that the teacher leave enough time for the reporting of these assessments to the class as a whole. Variations on group assessment can be more detailed assessments using the SI I format (See Appendix C); reflection papers; anonymous classroom assessment techniques (i.e., Cross/Angelo's CATs) with immediate and formative feedback from the teacher; journals with guided questions from the teacher; student observations and experiences in community based learning activities with reflections or applications writing as one end product. In all cases, the teacher may add her/his own "assessment of the assessment", giving feedback on the strengths and areas for improvement of the assessment and ending with his/her insights gained from the student's assessment. The assessment form can also be adapted to include the student assessor's "plan of action" which identifies concrete strategies for improvement of skills and achievement of goals (see Appendix D). Variations in timing might be to have weekly reflector's report, and variations in content might be to focus on a particular area of the learning skills. At this point, teachers may also add assessment of the group by its members, assessment of role performance of each member within the group, individual self-assessment or assessment of the activity and/or facilitator (see Appendix E) . When a large project has been completed and a product is completed, it can also be very instructive for one group to assess another group's product.

Three important details to remember are timing, clear criteria and closure . First, immediate feedback or ASAP feedback is an essential aspect of formative assessment--the "longer off the fire, the colder the iron." The process learning teacher takes this into account when allotting time for the various components of an activity. Second, no matter what form the assessment takes, the crucial component for success is to state defined, readily identifiable criteria in objective, behaviorally descriptive terms. Lastly, assessment--whether shared or private-provides closure for the learning experience and a means of coming full circle for the learner, making

7

a cohesive whole out of the many parts of the learning activity. Too often this is a function that is devalued and ignored.

The fourth element of teacher-student communication in a process learning class becomes essential as group work comes with no guarantee of smooth sailing. When groups hit some type of roadblock, either self-constructed or otherwise, the teacher's function becomes one of facilitating the group in identifying the problem by using "constructive interventions". Constructive interventions usually consist of asking the question that will set the group on the right track for identifying · its roadblock. Examples would be: asking the group to identify their purpose or goal; asking for multiple points of view, asking the students to identify the source of their conflict; asking if the rules of engagement are being followed, asking students to paraphrase for accuracy of understanding, asking which learning skill is needed at that moment. This is very difficult for many of us as we tend to want to give answers rather than respond with another question. Krumsieg and Baehr recognize our dilemma when stating, "While it is tempting to answer a question with an eloquent, informative response, it is better if the facilitator can stand back and encourage or direct students to discover an answer on their own (Krumsieg, Baehr, 1997)." In discovery learning "try it" is preferable to "here is what I, the teacher, think" when dealing with problem solving. In the case of social maintenance conflicts, we tell ourselves, "I was not present for all of the group interaction. How do I know who is right?" Skilled constructive interventions can facilitate discussion between students about their own perceptions and behaviors that contributed to the conflict, allowing the teacher to become the neutral mediator rather than adjudicator. Skill in constructive interventions increases when we restrain our impulse to answer question with a statement and replace our own reading of the situation with questions that prompt the group to reflect on either the content of the course or behavior of the group members.

One powerful tool which aids teachers in developing critical questioning skills is a taxonomy of learning skills which both the teacher and learners use. This taxonomy provides for both the teacher and the students, particularly during the reflector's reports, a common vocabulary which identifies the multiple and varied learning skills necessary for life-long learning. A familiar taxonomy is Bloom's cognitive taxonomy. The process learning taxonomy developed by Dan Apple and the Pacific Crest is very similar but goes beyond the cognitive domain into the affective, social and psychomotor domains (see Appendix F). Assessment cannot happen if students (and teachers!) do not know what is assessable. The taxonomy supplies the terms missing from many students' vocabulary that describe learning skills and categorize them for easy access. Although the taxonomy may be unfamiliar to both teacher and student, its concerted usage reaps discussion and observation benefits that few other tools can match.

What are the benefits of the process learning format for communication in the classroom? First of all, participation increases. With groups of four (three can be workable; more than four is undesirable) there is more opportunity for all to be heard. It is the teacher's responsibility to construct an activity that is of interest and

8

relevance to the students and is sufficiently challenging in terms of intellectual reach and application. Given that, few students can resist participating when they do not have to vie for participation with twenty or more others. More importantly, everyone has a clearly defined role or "job" which requires communication in order for the group to effectively accomplish the desired outcomes. When everyone has clearly defined responsibilities, equitable participation is an inevitable result of one's role performance.

Second, accountability for performance is easier to track. This, in turn, leads to more valid assessment of performance. If there is a problem in the group, either task or social maintenance, it is easier to trace the source of the problem, as it is almost always related to the non-performance of some aspect of one's role. If the role is clearly defined, then the level of performance in that role becomes more easily observable. And if role performance is clearly observable then assessment of role performance is much more objective, specific and measurable. The construction of such objective and measurable criteria for performance is one of the hardest and most elusive of skills to master but is essential that the process learning teacher carefully design and apply such criteria especially since we are asking our students to do it as well. Many students grumble about not being qualified to assess others or themselves and look upon the teacher as the only valid source of assessment. Here is where the use of the taxonomy of learning skills reaps its greatest benefits as it enables students to acquire those assessment skills that they do no have upon entrance into the class. Students' assessments cannot be the sole or major source of feedback for other students, but the skills which are developed-identifying criteria, applying the criteria and supporting their judgments-are an integral part of critical thinking and problem solving.

Whatever the term used by the teacher to describe the redistribution of power in the classroom, the "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education," as presented in a special edition of Wingspread Journal, June, 1987, make an excellent yardstick by which all classes can be measured. In this article, Chickering, Gamson, and others suggest that good praxis of education (1) encourages student-faculty contact, (2) encourages cooperation among students, (3) encourages active learning, (4) gives prompt feedback, (5) emphasizes time on task, (6) communicates high expectations and (7) respects diverse talents and ways of learning (Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 1991 ). All teacher-to-student communication must be guided by these principles in order to foster trust and confidence essential for open communication.

Student-to-Student

As the classroom teacher works towards a democratic classroom, it becomes apparent that classroom communication time should be spent primarily in student­to-student communication. Paulo Freire states that "through dialogue, reflecting together on what we know and don't know, we can then act critically to transform reality" (Shor, Freire, 1987). The most salient feature of process learning is the

9

degree to which it encourages students to conduct that dialogue and reflection primarily with each other. As I stated earlier, many students do not feel confident about their ability to assess themselves or each other. While it is true that they may not be aware of important criteria for assessment, they can certainly learn with little difficulty if given useful models. The same is true for mastery of content. They may not initially trust their ability to discern what is important and relevant and but they develop these learning skills more quickly and integrate the course content more completely when they participate in dialogue among themselves. They learn to value the opinions of others, not just the authority figure present in the form of the teacher, and to take on the role of contributor to knowledge rather than simply acceptor of knowledge.

Through the use of real-time assessment in the form of the reflector's report students learn to identify and observe specific behaviors which contribute to learning. They begin to accept each other as "teacher'' and gain expertise in the ability to recognize that which is valuable from that which is not. In the S I I, they reinforce their strengths, set goals for improvement that they choose themselves and generate insights which reflect original thought and synthesis. For me, the insights are the climax of each class. I am continually amazed at how perceptive the students' thinking becomes with a little practice and a climate free from dogma. And because the reflector's S I I reports are immediate to the situation, students quickly internalize the assessments, increasing the likelihood of behavioral growth.

During those times of student-to-student dialogue the teacher needs to attend to the observation of engagement rules-those norms for discussion that promote civility, open-mindedness and reflection. These norms must be established early on; vigilance in their maintenance will insure that the groups do not degenerate into opinionated camps or unequitable participation. Some teachers distribute a prepared list; others have students generate the rules for discussion. Whichever method is used, the teacher is responsible for establishing and maintaining a classroom environment where dialogue and assessment are safe, achievable and valid (Krumsieg and Baehr, 1997).

One last aspect of student-to-student communication lies in the concept of "crossing boundaries" (Hooks, 1994). In our social lives we tend to associate with those who are like us. Security, a sense of belonging, the comfort of the familiar - these are reasons for maintaining an insularity that can be personally and intellectually inhibiting and perpetuate perceptions that may lead to circumstances which may threaten the well-being of our communities. Many faculty believe we have an obligation to provide opportunities for students to have access to other points of view and to explore the diversity of thought present within our individual classes as well as in our local and national cultures. Opportunities for crossing boundaries enlarge students' worlds more than an individual teacher can begin to do. Our role is to foster circumstances and an environment whereby all students can gain access to different perceptions within a secure, open-minded democratic environment. Process learning contributes to this through its emphasis on student role performance and accountability, reflection and assessment, and

10

lesson design components. Cross/Angelo techniques which encourage different points of view include the minute paper, muddiest point, value positions and opinion poll, pro and con grid, everyday ethical dilemmas, goal ranking and matching, background survey, invented dialogue, and others. Cooperative techniques that contribute to student-to-student communication are guided peer questioning, think­pair-share, the jigsaw, town meeting, structured controversy, "go to your post", and group to group exchange to name just a few. Collaboration on research projects, community projects, and product construction also lend themselves to accessing diverse needs and viewpoints. All of these have as a common philosophy the concept of teacher perspective as different, not better (Brooks & Kelly, 1992). By becoming active learners who follow models of discipline-specific ways of knowing, students become co-investigators in the discipline and co-heirs to all the potential learning that comes with this status.

Student-to-Self

The most important gift we can give our students is the ability to become their own mentors, teachers, guides, companions and evaluators. I have avoided using the word "empowerment" but it is time to say that faculty should create opportunities for student self-empowerment. This is achieved at the student-to-self level as each student comes to feel personally empowered as a learner. How can the teacher know the student feels empowered?

One possible means of assessing this in a class as a whole is the Learner Empowerment Instrument (Frymier, Shulman & Houser, 1996). This measurement scale, based on Thomas and Velthouse's conceptualization of empowerment, proposes four dimensions of empowerment: impact, choice, competence and meaningfulness. Based on these four dimensions, Schultz and Schulman devised a Likert scale questionnaire for student responses (see Appendix G). Such an instrument may be a useful tool for collecting statistical data over many classes or programs and may provide data for programs or institutions who wish to move towards empowering students.

Student empowerment, however, requires the ability of the student to self­monitor, to be able to look at oneself with as little distortion as possible. Once students have integrated the skills necessary to active learning and assessment they can move to the independent level of planning their own strategies for learning based on their self-identified preferences and goals. The more involved the learner is mentally, the more internal dialogue occurs in the student's personal reflection time. The more students examine their own learning, the more likely they are to take control of that learning. Opportunities for self-reflection and self-assessment must be provided within the class itself so that students may be habituated to self-reflection outside of class. In our hurried lives, rushing from one task to another, it is easy to forget Plato's admonition: "A life unexamined is not worth living".

In the past, I rushed through material so that I might righteously and proudly stand up and say at the end of the semester, "I covered it all!" Is that my goal-to

11

cover it all? I continually struggle with resolving the tension between the lack of time (or my perceived lack of time), the brevity of teacher-student contact time and the amount of material I feel compelled to cover. I am reminded by the Kirkwood mission statement, however, that my ultimate goal is "to promote opportunities for lifelong learning". I contend that this cannot be done without each student's reflecting upon his/her own learning skills, experiences, needs, goals, and performance in relation to the content of the course and the practice of self-reflection. But once self-reflection becomes the norm for processing every experience in the classroom it will become the norm for processing every experience outside the classroom. Teachers need to model this for students, both in class and out of class. We, too, need to self-reflect every bit as much as our students on what we have gained during the class and how we can continue to grow as students in our discipline and members of the learning circle we call "class."

This brings us back to that largest circle in the target metaphor-teacher-to­teacher communication. In one sense, that is what I have done in this paper­reached out to you, the reader, in order to initiate a dialogue so that both of us might cross those boundaries of time, space and perhaps philosophy that separate us. We must return to the teaching circles at our community colleges, colleges and universities and renew our commitment to democratizing education and continue to develop our proficiencies in active learning. As we ask our students to suspend their habits and fears in order to stretch their minds, we must demand of ourselves the same.

When I reflect on the experiences that were the most influential in my life, each one built on something that had come before. Each one was inseparable from what preceded it and what followed it. The lines that separate the concentric circles in a target are arbitrary and mean nothing to the arrow. Similarly, the demarcation lines of the four concentric circles of communication disappear as we shift from the instruction paradigm to the learning paradigm. The Process Learning Project seeks to minimize the contrived distinctions between students and teachers through the acceptance and implementation of the techniques which stem from the new learning paradigm of education. We seek to mirror the authentic experience of learning, where artificial distinctions which separate students and teachers dissolve. Teachers and students alike become learners, excited about learning, motivated to help others learn and capable of improving the dynamic processes of learning for ourselves. Teachers become students and students become teachers.

12

Bibliography

Angelo, Tom and Cross, K Patricia. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers, 2nd ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.

Barr, R. and John Tagg. "From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education." Change 27 (6): 12-25 (Nov./Dec. 1995).

Brookes, Anne-Louise and Ursula A. Kelly. "Writing Pedagogy: A Dialogue of Hope." In What Schools Can Do: Critical Pedagogy and Practice, Weiler, K. & Mitchell, C. (eds.), pp. 265-281 . New York: SUNY Press, 1992

Carroll, Sarah M. with Steven W. Beyerlein. Leaming Assessment Journal. Corvallis, OR, 1996.

Frymier, Ann Bainbridge, Gary M. Schulman, and Marian Houser. "The Development of a Learner Empowerment Measure". Communication Education 45, 181-199 (July 1996).

Hooks, Bell. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge, 1994.

Hutchings, Pat. Using Cases to Improve College Teaching; A Guide to More Reflective Practice, AAHE Teaching Initiative, American Association for Higher Education, 1993.

Making Teaching Community Property; A Menu for Peer Collaboration and Peer Review, AAHE Teaching Initiative, American Association for Higher Education, 1996.

Johnson, David W., Roger Johnson and Karl Smith. Active Leaming: Cooperation in the Classroom, Edina.MN. Interaction Book Co., 1991.

Krumsieg, Karl & Marie Baehr. Foundations of Leaming, Pacific Crest Software. Corvallis , OR. 1996.

Shor, Ira and Paulo Freire. "What is the 'Dialogical Method' of Teaching?", Journal of Education, 169 (3): 11-31 (1987).

Slavin, Robert, et al., eds. Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn. New York: Plenum Press, 1985.

13

A PPENV IX A

I - --~-_;.-";f:. ~ ~ •.•• " .-·-· :-::'\~ , '1>,, ] ~ . .. --- ~-..;~~:-··:·,.,,~~--~:.1>.~~: .. ..i,:;~·-:.-: "' , _: .-.,,, .:, .. i,,.; .. -·~---.,j ...

i I Team Leader/Captain 11. 'j •. Keep the process enjoyable and rewarding for

team members. 1. 1 Make sure each team member has a role and is

' ··.·.• ..

3.

4. 5.

6. 7.

1.

1

3.

-i.

5.

6.

1. .,

3. 'I .

5.

performing within that role. Ensure that all te:un members can articulate what has been learned. Manage time, stress, and conflict. Control the process and irs pacing; keep members focused. Contribute to the group and actively learn. Maintain accouncability for the overall performance of the te:un.

Recorder Record group roles and instructions at the beginning of J task. Document legibly and accurately group decisions and discoveries in a Recorder's journal or "learning journal." ~iaimain accounc:ibiliry for the overJ.11 quality of the Recorder's journll. Control the information flow, :inicul:ne concepts in alternative forms when necessary. Prepare a report which can be used for discussion purposes when required: integrate and synthesize wheri several ideas are presented. Contribute co the group and actively learn.

Spokesperson Speak for the te:un when called upon to do so. Ask questions posed by the te:un or request clarificJtion . . Make oral presentations to the class for the te:un. Use the Recorder's journal to share the team's discoveries and insights. Collaborate periodically with the Recorder. Contribute co the group and actively le:irn.

Reflector 1. Make observations :ibout the team's performance,

inter:ictions, and the dyn:unics among te:un members. .,

3.

4.

5.

6.

/ .

8.

1. .,

3.

4.

5 6.

Be a good listener and observer. Analyze and record strengths, areas for improvement, and insighcs into a "Reflector's journ::tl." Maintain accountability for the overall quality of the Reflector's journal. Report periodically to the group (and possibly others) from the Reflector's journal, rephrasing evaluations in :i positive and constructive manner. Intervene with observations about the process and suggest strategies for change. Remind the Te:im Le:ider of his or her duties. Contribute to the group and actively learn.

Technology Specialist Oper:ite :ind use the Jv:iilable technology. Listen. converse. and collabor:ite with te:un members: synthesize inpucs, cry suggestions and/or follow directions. Retrieve inform:ition from various sources; manage the available resources and information. Help te:un members to understand the technology and how it is being used. Be willing to e.xperimem, illke risks, and Try It! Contribute to the group and actively learn.

K,tum.!) .{.e.g aHd Bae.h:r.., Founda. .t .{.Ort .!i qj t:e.alt.rt .{.ng, 1996.

Tclm: ---------

APPENVIX B ~

R~corder's-~port ff ,-Date:----------

.\,tivity: ------------ iiJJ;;

Before the activity

Record the basic agenda or plan as outlined by the team leader:

During the activity

~ore important points of the team discussion:

Instructor Feedback Strengths:

Areas for Improvement :

Insights:

' Ca. ,'t1tote. a.nd Be.ye.1tle.,i.n1

Le.a.1tn,i.ng A,.'i ,.'ie. ,.'i.6me.n.t Jou.1tna.l, 1996.

A,..,..ENVIX C

Date:-----------

Activicy:~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Individual member's performance

,. .... , •r1• for ;,,.,,.,,.,,,.mt

,,.,,., .,.,. for ;,,.,.,.,,.,_,

,. .... ,

rou .,,. for ;,,.,,.,,.,,,.,,.,

Team Performance

One team's greatest strength:

Two important areas for improvement: Actions to improve our performance:

1.

2.

Two insights about your tc:im 's performance, this class, or learning in general:

1.

2.

One question we have about our team's performance:

How did the instructor help u.s the most?

Instructor Feedback

Strengths:

Areas for Improvement:

Insights:

C a.tr.. tr.. o le. a. rt d 8 e. y e. tr..l e.-<. rt , L e. a. tr.. rt-<. rt g A~ ,!i e. -6 -6 me. rt .t Jo u. tr.. rt a..e. , 1 9 9 6 •

Dace: ____ _ Role:--------

Acti~cy:-------------~

Based on my performance today/ this week:

My two greatest strengths:

l.

2.

My two most important areas for improvement:

1.

2.

My plan of action co address the most critical area for improvement:

Short term:

Long tcnn:

Assess progress toward my previous plan of action:

---------------- helped me by--------------------

What is the most valuable thing I learned today/ this week and why?

In what area did I grow the most and why?

Instructor Feer.!~ack Strengths:

Areas for Improvement:

Insights:

' ca..'t'tote. a.nd Be.ye,11.le.,<.YL, Le.a. ,'tn,<.ng A,He..6.6me.n.t Jou.ttnae., 1996.

APPENVIX E

Date:----Role:------Acti~ey: ___________ _

Assessment of my performance during this activity Strengths: Areas for Improvement:

Insight:

Assessment of my team's performance during this activity Strengths: Areas for Improvement:

Insight:

Assessment of my instructor's performance during this activity Strengths: Areas for Improvement:

Insight:

Assessment of the activity (content, design, and procedures) Strengths: Areas for Improvement:

Insight:

Instructor Feedback Strengths:

Areas for Improvement:

Insights:

Ca -'tlto.lf.. and Be.ye.1tle.-<.n, Le.a1tning A!i ,!ie. ,~,~me.n.t Jou1tnae., 7 996.

A PPENV IX F

THE TAXONOMY OF PROCESS EDUCATION Cognitive Domain

Information Processing

Collecting Dau Skimming Listening Notc: ·t:iking Rc:iding Observing Experimenting

Organizing & Classifying Dau Outlining Memorizing Filing Systematizing Categorizing Det::rmining quality of data Evaluating appropriateness

Retrieving Data Brainstorming &membc:ring Accessing information systems

Critical Thinking

Modeling Visualizing Estimating Simplifying Making: assumptions

Analyzing Anal,·zing similarities Analn.in g differc:ncc:s Using deduction lnrc:rprc:cing Recognizing panerns

Synthesizing Making connections Generalizing Tn.nsferring Defining rules Designing systems

R.asoning Prediccng Inferring Lateral thinking Quehioning assumptions Using induction

K~umJ .ieg a~d Baeh~,

Problem Solving

Setting up the Problem Identifying the problem Defining the problem Identif)ing key issues Idc:ntif)ing assumptions

Structuring the Problem Partitioning Defining k.nov.ns Defining unknowns Sequencing

Solving the Problem Integrating solutions Applving prior knowledge: Reusing problem solutions

Assessing Problem Solution(s) Validating Documenting Understanding context Ensuring: solution robustness

Research

Identifying Knowledge Needs Idc:n~ing learning requirements Identifying missing knowledge Evaluating existing paradigm &cognizing need for new paradigm Making hypotheses

Discovering Creating linkages Designing experiments Testing hypothesis Drawing conclusions Finding counter examples Sharing ownership of ideas Structuring new paradigm

Peer Review Communicating results Peer assessing Adapong peer assessments

Social Domain

Teamwork

Inception Recruiting Defining roles

Problem Orienution Goal setting Plan rung

Conflict Resolution Respecting diversity Adapting Politicking ~c:g:otiating

Comrnwucation

Creating a Message Dc:firung a purpose: Articulating an idea Defining outcomes Rephrasing

Evahuting the Audience Idc:ntif)ing characteristics Adapting to ciivc:rsiry Ada;,ring to c:ontc:xt Choosing the: Medium Idc:nti~-ing needs

Presenting Information Writing ,,.,;th technical detail Writing creatively Conversing Dcbacng Informative presentation Persuasive: prc:sc:ncation Communicating with graphics

Assessing the Impact Assessing expressions Assi:ssing body language Listening to feedback Listening to dialog Measuring outcomes

199 6.

Management

M.tnaging Organizations Mocincing Hiring Firing Promoting Ev:tlu:icing Perform:utce F:icilir:icing change Ddcg:icing :iuthority Building consensus Le:iding .\1:irketing

M.a.aaging Resources Budgeting .\lloclting C cilizacion Adjusting usage Requisitioning

M.a.aaging Systems Designing Implementing ~1odifying ~erworking

Language Development

Identifying Context Culrur.tl badtground Hisroric:il background Purpose

Dec:oding Communication Pattern recognition .-\$signing mc:ining C ndcmanding symbols

l.'. nderstanding Synta.x Word recognition Sentence strucrure Grammar

Identifying Scmantic.s Recognizing meaning Rhetoric Llscening

Building Vocabulary Memorization Practice and usage

Affective Domain

Assessment

Designing an Assessment Setting criteria Cre:iting :i me:isuring system Assuring v:ilidity Assuring completeness

Conducting an Assessment Evaluating :igainst criteria Collecting reliable data

Reporting an Assessment Offering feedback Reflection/introspection Complimenting

Personal Development

U nderstand.ing Values Developing personal ,·alucs De\·eloping family values ti ndem:inding diverse

value systems Ethics

Understanding Emotions Risk t:iking Self-esteem Responding to success Responding to failure Coping

Self· ~agement Setting personal goals Setting priorities Focusing on wits Making decisions Adapting co change Persim:nce Mmaging curiosity .-\ssessin g personal needs Managing stress Managing time Managing hc:ilth Managing frustration Self-confidence

Arts & Esthctics

Appreciating Beauty Empathy Self-expression Enjoyment

Appreciating Mystery Risk riling Problem solving Suspension of disbelief

Appreciating Hwnor RcsponJ.ing to humor Producing humor Underst:mding context

Producing Art lm:iginacion Artistic ability

Psychomotor Domain

Basic/Essential Needs

Caring for the Body Dier Hygiene Sleep

Renewing the Body Recreation Relaxation

Physical Development

Developing the Body Sa-eng:th Agility Coordination Endur:mcc:

Tool Usage

Using Physica.1 Productivity Tools Eye/hand coordination Physical acuity

Using Commun.ic.ation Tools Verbal and auditory relationships Writing Tclc:communications

Using Information Processing Tools ubor:itory dc:\iCeS Computers Inrernet Library Validating Craftsmanship Assessment Sclf-assessmc:nt

APPENDIX G

l. I feel confident that I can adequately perform my duties. CO 2. I have the power to make a. dilf erence in how things a.re done in my class. ™ 3. Class is consistent with my values. ME 4. My participation is important to the success of the class.™ 5. My instructor makes me feel inadequate. CO 6. I actively participate in a.11 the tasks required of my class. ™ 7. I typically do more work than is required by the syllabus. CH 8. I a.m overwhelmed by all the work my class requires. CO 9. I work ha.rd for class because I want to, not because I have to. ME

10. I have a choice in the methods I can use to perfonn my work. CH 11. The tasks required in my class a.re personally meaningful. ME 12. I like to talk about what I'm doing in m~· class with friends or family. ME 13. I feel intimidated by what is required of me in my class. CO 14. I can make an impact on the way things a.re run in my class. IM 15. ~ly instructor allows flexibility in the wa~· I perform my tasks. CH 16. I look forward to going to my class. IM 17. My instructor believes that he or she must control how I do my work. CH 18. Expressing my own attitudes and ideis is rewarded in my class. CH 10. I :igree with the standards I must meet in my class. ME 20. I possess the necessary skills to perform successfully in class. CO 21. My success in this class is under my control. IM 22. My instructor thinks he or she is always right. CH 23. ! find my class to be exciting and energizing. CO 24. I have a high level of autonomy in accomplishing my work. CH 25. I find my class to be interesting. M:E 26. I can be creative in the way I perform the tasks required in my class. CH 27. The tasks required by my class are valuable to me. ME 28. The tasks required by my class are v:ilued by potential employers. IM 2!1. I agree with the meaning my inscructor has for what good performance on class work is. ME 30. I am ;ible to perform the necessa.r:· acti ... ities to succeed in my class. CO

M:E = meaningfulness. CO = competence. IM: = impact, CH = choice. Items are responded to in a Likert-rype sea.le with O = never and 4 = very often format.

F,'tymie1t, A. e.t a..t. "The. Ve.ve.lopmen.t 06 a. Le.a.1tne1t Empowe.1tme.n:t Me.a..ou.Jte.", Commu.n.ic.a..t.ion Edu.c.a..tion, .JS July 1996, p.187.