Many of our classrooms have been active for years, maybe decades. In a typical CIT course, for example, students interact with hardware and/or software almost every time they meet. But is doing enough to guarantee learning? Are students forming synapses – or are they just connecting dots?
Authenticity
Students must connect if we hope to help them to learn. Memorization is not too hard, but unfortunately, it is rarely deep and facts are often fleeting. Because we strive for learning rather than just short-term recall, we need to help students sense personal value.
One way is to place lessons in a familiar context. Finding a few scenarios that students share is usually feasible; we can talk of class registration, parking, Traverse City events, Sodexo meal plans, and so forth. However, since we don’t know our students – not deeply, anyway, and certainly not all of them – we run out of fresh and stimulating ideas long before the end of the semester.
Students tend to be open to the unfamiliar if they believe they will face similar situations in their future. They also connect when a project feels “real.” Service learning and well-designed simulations work well, but both are risky – we must be ready with “plan B” if (more likely, when) something unexpected happens. Both also take tremendous energy to facilitate.
Repetition
Unless learners are exposed to unusual or intense stimuli, most learning does not happen during the first exposure to new material. I aim for three or more distinct student interactions for each significant concept. Are we (am I?) creative enough to design a variety of activities that drive home a new topic without making it feel repetitious? It’s challenging! Boredom is the enemy! Occasionally we can add excitement – we can share our stories, our passions; we can be “up.” Sometimes we can even bring cookies.
Cognition
Do students learn better when they contemplate their learning? That’s a topic for next week…
Jeff
It sounds like you and I are cut from the same cloth. I am also a big fan of authentic learning…but in mathematics. I use project based learning to immerse students in real world applications.
Some of your ideas sound like what I have been reading in Brain Rules by John Medina. Specifically, engaging students with emotional experiences. I have found this very effective to grab the students attention once I have lost it. Do you have any sources you have found useful for engaging students?
Dave,
Thanks for the feedback and for the suggestion. I haven’t yet read Brain Rules by John Medina; I’ll look into it.
Regarding engaging students, I’ve attended several conferences (POD, Lilly, Teaching Professor, etc.) that share great suggestions, and I read books as I can. Maryellen Weimer’s “Learner-Centered Teaching,” Michaelsen, Knight, and Fink’s “Team-Based Learning,” and a few recent books by Terry Doyle are favorites.
Hi Jeff,
Your post challenged me to dive deeper. Here is what came out. Learning is different for different types of material. For example, repetition is essential in math. Students will listen to an instructor explain how to do a quadratic equation, However, the student will not learn how to do the quadratic equation without practice, lots of it.
Concepts can be grasped in a heartbeat. For example, ask a group of students to put together a puzzle. Then ask the same students to write about their role in putting together the group puzzle. Then tell them to consider the possibility: Is how I do the puzzle how I do life? Aha! Students get it. They can sense that perhaps taking charge and taking over is really how they treat their family, friends, and co-workers. And does this new knowledge have any implications, anything they may want to change.
Great job on your post here. I agree with the repetition and authenticity.