Pedagogy Syllabus Y3

IGERT MNM (Magnetic and Nanostructured Materials )

A collaboration between Norfolk State University, Cornell University, Purdue University

Best Practices in Teaching and Learning

Group: Tasha Zephirin, Sha’la Fletcher, Tanya David, Casey Gonder

Advising Professor: Dr. Monica Cox

 

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

The main objective of this module is to help the IGERT trainees and associate trainees develop pedagogical expertise so they can integrate pedagogy within their disciplinary areas. As a Trainee, you will:

  • Develop pedagogical expertise through an introduction to theoretically-based teaching methods and strategies that can be incorporated into your future teaching or collaborative opportunities and communication strategies.
  • Identify ways that your personal research can be communicated other educational contexts
  • Explore the impacts of teaching and curricular innovations on “student” (i.e. K-12, collegiate, working professional, research group member, etc.) learning.

 

LEARNING OUTCOMES:

Upon completion of this module, trainees will be able to:

Knowledge & Transfer

  • Describe differences between expert and novice learners
  • Identify factors that influence knowledge transfer
  • Describe how knowledge on how the mind and brain works can be leveraged in educational contexts

How People Learn (HPL) Framework

  • Explain the four dimensions of the “How People Learn” (HPL) framework.
  • Operationalize HPL elements in STEM learning environments.
  • Identify challenges implementing HPL elements in STEM learning environments.

Assessment

  • Describe the importance of assessment in engineering education
  • Differentiate between types of assessment (e.g. formative and summative)
  • Write learning objectives & link learning objectives to appropriate assessments

Backwards Design

  • Explain the Backward Design process
  • Apply Backward Design as a framework for designing a learning experience
  • Link appropriate assessments to curricular priorities in the Backward Design framework

Engagement Strategies

  • Identify strategies to engage learners
  • Describe ….[BT1]

Communication

  • Translate knowledge, skills & insights from technical research to formal and informal learning environments
  • Tailor communication of technical content to selected audiences
  • Explore the use of video in communicating an idea

 

By the end of the 8 weeks trainees will have developed a final deliverable. The deliverable should reflect the pedagogical content knowledge and curricular knowledge trainees have gained from the previous weeks of the module. The final goal is to design a 3 minute video which will communicate your research or an aspect of your research proposal to a general audience.

 

MODULE REQUIREMENTS:

Each week, trainees will be expected to complete a weekly homework assignment and a short reflection on the current week’s readings.

(1)  Weekly reflections based on the readings will be emailed/posted to the googlegroup by noon the day before the next meeting. There are no specific requirements for the length or content of the reflection.

-       A prompt/question will be provided on the message board. Please post your reflection within that week’s particular thread

-        Respond to at least 2 other Trainees reflection e.g. comment on the thought, suggest additional question/points to consider etc.

(2)  Weekly homework assignments are described in the table below. To assist with the development of the video, assignments will be versions of a storyboard draft in powerpoint, with additional information being added or revised weekly.

For access to the googlegroup, go to the following link and request to be added to the group: https://groups.google.com/d/forum/igert-mnm-ed. Addition to the group requires instructor approval.

 

Feedback on homework assignments will be given within one week of homework submission according to the evaluation rubric (separate document).

 

Wk #

Topic

Homework Activity

(due following week)

Readings

(New)

Readings (Returning)

1

Introduction

/Learning objectives

/Overview of backward design & assessment

 

Video Overview:

Introduction thoughts for proposed video: Identify content (main topic), learning objectives, context (human, organizational, environmental factors) and anticipated setting (physical or virtual environment)

 

 

 

2

 

Communication

Video Overview:

Identify strategies you will use to ensure effective communication of your topic.

 

Video Storyboard:

Add initial brainstorms of what can be included in the video. Focus on general ideas/flow.

The Science Gap (8 min video):

1)    How does info get to the public?

2)    How do we influence public perceptions of research(ers)?

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1549

 

Gilbert, R., Balatti, J., Turner, P., & Whitehouse, H. (2004). The generic skills debate in research higher degrees. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 375–388. doi:10.1080/0729436042000235454

 

SKIM:

Dance your Ph.D. (click on a video that peaks your interest) http://gonzolabs.org/dance/videos/

 

I-RITE/I-SPEAK is a Stanford program that teaches graduate students and postdocs to prepare and deliver highly understandable, compelling oral and written accounts of their research for non-specialized audiences. http://www.stanford.edu/group/i-rite/statements/index.html

 

 

3

Learners & Learning

(How People Learn Intro)

 

Video Overview:

Outline audience/participants including who the program targets, expected demographics (if possible), expected prior knowledge and/or skills. Video Storyboard:

Further brainstorms of what can be included in the video. Focus on general ideas/flow.

 

 

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press. Chapters 2, 3, 5

 

 

Krause, S. J. (2012). Development of a crystal spatial visualization survey for introductory materials classes. Proceedings of the 2012 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. San Antonio, TX.

 

4

Assessment / Backwards Design[BT2]

&

Video “How-to” discussion

Video Overview:

For each learning goal, identify its curricular priority, task, and how you will know the goal was achieved. Ensure that goal, task, and acceptable evidence are aligned.

 

Video Storyboard:

Further brainstorms of what can be included in the video. Focus on general images, pictures, how the ideas will be presented

 

Wiggins, G., & McTighe. (1998). Understanding by Design. Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall. Chapter 1

 

New Revision: Online book: Understanding By Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005)

 

 

 

 

Identify and share video making tools, how to guides, ideas for video designs etc.

5

How People Learn framework – Design of Learning Environments

Video Overview:

Describe how aspects of your video will align with the HPL framework.

 

Video Storyboard:

Draft video outline aligning your ideas and flow with general images, pictures. Include “script” in the notes section of the powerpoint

 

 

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press. Chapters 1, 6

 

 

 

HPL application TBD

6

Engagement Strategies

Video Storyboard:

Final video outline aligning your ideas and flow with general images, pictures. Include “script” in the notes section of the powerpoint

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reading TBD

7

Curriculum Development overview/ Group feedback

 

Finalize video and be prepared to use one assessment strategy with the IGERT-MNM audience

 

8

Final Presentation

 

Video presentation with IGERT audience incorporating one of your assessment strategies (5 mins per trainee)


 

ASSESSMENT:[t3]

 

At the beginning of each workshop there will be:

-       General homework review

-       Short, open discussion on challenges faced completing current assignment & questions regarding previous week’s material

-       Peer feedback on homework assignment

 

Supplemental Resources and Materials:

The following articles are not required readings but are related in different ways to certain weekly topics and may be of interest.

Week 3

Borrego, M. (2007). Conceptual difficulties experienced by trained engineers learning educational research methods. Journal of Engineering Education, 79(6), 735. doi:10.1021/ed079p735

Chi, M. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402

Felder, R. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(June), 674-681.

Felder, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72.

Perkins, D. (2009). Making Learning Whole: How Seven Principles of Teaching can Transform Education. Jossey-Bass.

Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. S. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279–294.

Week 6

Klein, S.S., and A.H. Harris. (2007). A user’s guide for the Legacy Cycle.

Journal of Education and Human Development 1 (1): 1–16

Challenge-Based Instruction - The VaNTH Biomechanics Learning Modules

Stump, G. S., Hilpert, J. C., Husman, J., Chung, W.-T., & Kim, W. (2011). Collaborative Learning in Engineering Students: Gender and Achievement. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(3), 475–497. Retrieved from http://www.jee.org/2011/July/04.pdf

Articles related to IGERT context

Golde, C. M. (1999). The Challenges of Conducting Interdisciplinary Research in Traditional Doctoral Programs. Ecosystems, 2(4), 281-285. doi:10.1007/s100219900076

Stephens, R., & Richey, M. (2011). Accelerating STEM Capacity : A Complex Adaptive System Perspective. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(3), 417-423.

Newstetter, W. C. (2011). UNPACKING THE INTERDISCIPLINARY MIND : Implications for teaching and learning. American Society for Engineering Education (pp. AC 2011-2614).

[BT1]Help with learning objectives?

E.g. pose a question early on

[BT2]Do we need more detail beyond the general idea presented in Week 1? If not, what additional topic or work session would be useful?

[t3]General guidelines will be developed to guide feedback each week


Previous page: Pedagogy Syllabus Y2
Next page: Pedagogy Syllabus Y4


South Africa on innovative technologies Nano-INNOV Nederland