UP Teaching & Learning Community Blog

Jeffrey White

By

The Tutoring Cycle as a Tool for Active Learning

Considering a tutoring approach for working with students during office hours

The Learning Commons at the University of Portland has made strides in professionalizing our tutors through training. Our syllabus includes 11 hours of live face-to-face training modules. In our training, trainees learn how the tutoring cycle provides structure for our tutoring sessions. As a faculty member, I’ve also adapted the tutoring cycle as a strategy for helping students during office hours.

Six basic steps make up the tutoring cycle:

  1. Greeting and setting expectations: In the peer tutoring session, it’s important that the tutor let the student know that she or he can expect to work at the whiteboard or think aloud while working with material. We train our tutors to state their roles in a first session with a student and to remind students of their expectations in subsequent meetings.
  2. Assessing the student’s needs and identifying tasks: While a student may say, “I want to work on my homework,” it’s important for the tutor to identify more precisely what the student is struggling with and what their goals are for the course. The former can be done by asking more probing questions or even having the student show how they’ve approached a specific homework problem or prompt. Drafting with the student a specific agenda for the session by using a checklist on the whiteboard (or on paper) is a handy way of making the tasks visible.
  3. Recommending and demonstrating strategies: Our peer tutors usually have strategies that they can share with students. These can range from reviewing concepts or processes in their notes or the book to specific approaches or rules of thumb to use when working on a problem or task.
  4. Formative assessment: Having students practice problems or tasks and apply demonstrated strategies offers the tutor and student the opportunity assess progress. We train tutors to give implicit feedback through questions and other means of highlighting student thinking and misconceptions. Notice that from the diagram that tutors can shuttle back and forth between formative assessment (practice) and demonstrating strategies.
  5. Summative assessment and planning for learning: Every session needs to end with some sort of summative assessment. This can be a final problem or prompt, or the tutor may direct the student to teach the material on the agenda or checklist back to the tutor. When in a rush, the tutor can have the student list three takeaways, two ways he or she will use the takeaways, and one question about the material that the student wants to pursue in the coming week, also called a 3-2-1 assessment technique. The tutor also works with the student to sketch out a plan for learning for the next week.
  6. Setting up a follow-up meeting: If needed or desired, the tutor invites the student to set up another time to meet.

How might this work in an office hour interaction?

  1. Letting students know that they will be actively thinking and working when you ask the student questions and direct them to elaborate on something or work at a whiteboard (or on paper).
  2. Taking time to dig deeper into what the student knows and doesn’t know can help you and the student to plan the office hour visit. You can separate between what is needed and what might be nice to know and then focus on the needs. Asking questions and having the student do some work will reveal areas needing your attention.
  3. Once you know the students needs, you can share strategies for working with the material, ways of conceiving of it, or even methods for keeping track of learning (e.g., effective note-taking strategies that you’ve learned over the years).
  4. Allowing time for the student to practice with the material gives you time to assess her or his progress.
  5. A simple teach-back or 3-2-1 technique offers you a sense of how effective the office hour interaction was.
  6. The invitation to return or to ask questions in class can help the student to feel a sense of belonging and added motivation to participate in your class.

As you practice these steps, you will learn ways to vary them and apply them to groups during office hours. Faculty office hours needn’t be about students coming in to be retaught the material. We can instead apply tools like the tutoring cycle and other student engagement approaches to support active learning, metacognition, and higher order thinking.

Jeffrey White is an instructor of German and directs Learning Commons in Buckley Center 163. For more information on the Learning Commons’ certified tutor training program, contact Jeffrey at white@up.edu or (503) 943-7141.

The Learning Commons is a program of the Shepard Academic Resource Center and offers trained peer support in writing papers, math, foreign language learning, biology, chemistry, physics, managing group projects, speeches and presentations, along with hosting tutoring for several nursing courses and business courses. 

By

Lesson Planning: At the Intersection of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Knowledge Dimensions

Revisiting Bloom’s Taxonomy

In the 1950’s Benjamin Bloom and other researchers collaborated to create what is known as Bloom’s Taxonomy of cognitive processes. This has been revised over the years and includes today six cognitive dimensions:

  • Remember: recall facts and basic concepts (e.g., define, list, state)
  • Understand: explain ideas or concepts (e.g., describe, explain, summarize)
  • Apply: use information in new situations (e.g., solve, complete, change)
  • Analyze: draw connections among ideas (e.g., contrast, categorize, connect)
  • Evaluate: justify a stand or decision (e.g., criticize, defend, prioritize)
  • Create: produce new or original work (e.g., design, modify, write)

The accompanying verbs can be used to develop and organize learning goals and objectives for our curricula, courses, and daily lesson plans. Many UP faculty already use Bloom’s Taxonomy as a guide for planning, but we can enhance the use of Bloom’s Taxonomy by considering our objectives through the lens of knowledge dimensions that Anderson and Krathwohl added to the taxonomy in 2001. The four dimensions are:

  • Factual knowledge (basic elements to learn in the discipline)
  • Conceptual knowledge (interrelationships between basic elements within a larger context)
  • Procedural knowledge (methods in the discipline)
  • Metacognitive knowledge (awareness of how learning work in relation to one’s self)

Anderson and Krathwohl developed a matrix for combining cognitive processes and knowledge dimensions that can be adapted when planning courses and lessons. As faculty, we can adapt this matrix in our own lesson planning. Here’s an example from a 300-level applied linguistics course that I teach in the Department of International Languages and Cultures.

Basic concept: Individual differences in language learning

Knowledge Dimension: Factual knowledge

Bloom’s Taxonomy Cognitive Process: Remember (Related actions verbs: define, list, state, recall, identify)

Learning Goal: Students can accurately define individual differences and list examples.Writing assistance working with student

Assessment: Students take a low-stakes quiz in which they define individual differences and provide examples they recall from the reading and group work activity.

Learning Experiences: 

  1. Students read section on individual differences in How Languages are Learned respond to reading prompts before class.
  2. In class, students work in groups to identify individual differences in written profiles of learners and present their findings.

Intersecting with multiple knowledge dimensions

As faculty, we can also run concepts and theories we teach through both multiple knowledge and cognitive process dimensions as we plan instruction. Let’s take, for example, the social cultural theoretical perspective of second language acquisition from the same applied linguistics course

Factual dimension / Remember

Instructor provides learning experiences so that students practice recalling definitions of terms and characteristics and elements of the theory.

Conceptual dimension / Understand

Students participate in learning experiences that guide them to start explaining principles and models of the social cultural perspective. It’s important to note that at this level, the students are not just restating an author’s or instructor’s explanation; that would be remembering. Rather, they are using concepts, terms, and paraphrasing to explain the concept or theory.

Procedural dimension / Analyze

Eventually, students point out passages in a research text that indicate the linguistics researcher is writing from the social cultural perspective of second language learning. They are using their knowledge of the theory as an analytical tool.

Metacognitive dimension / Apply

Finally, the instructor can work with students to develop and apply motivational and language learning strategies that are based on a social cultural perspective of second language learning.

The above processes can also be reorganized into a class lesson planning tool.

Application in your teaching

The combination of Bloom’s Taxonomy and knowledge dimensions create a powerful approach for your faculty toolbox in support of our efforts to provide the excellent undergraduate education opportunities to our students. For more about deploying Bloom’s Taxonomy and the four dimensions of knowledge, check out Laurie Richlin’s Blueprint for Learning: Construction College Courses to Facilitate, Assess, and Document Learning (2006), one of the sources of today’s TLC blog entry. If you would like to explore in more detail using dimensions and Bloom’s Taxonomy verbs in a lesson planning form, download this MS Word version.

Jeffrey White directs the Learning Commons in the Shepard Academic Resource Center in Buckley Center 163, where he trains tutors to reach Level 1 of the International Tutor Training Program Certification. He also teaches German, an applied linguistics course, and a preparation course for study abroad in the Department of International Languages and Cultures. Jeffrey is currently the president-elect of the Northwest College Reading and Learning Association. He is happy to meet over coffee or lunch to discuss course and lesson design, training, and teaching in higher education and can be reached at white@up.edu.

By

Supportive Resources for Teaching and Learning

students and tutors sitting together at a small round tableWelcome back faculty! We are all now four weeks into our annual sojourn into a new academic year. During our journey as disciplinary experts, we have opportunities to develop and refine the craft of teaching at the college level. The University of Portland and several colleagues on campus offer resources to support our reflective teaching. These include the REFLECT team, the Untethered Lecture Capture initiative, the Ignite Grant program, CISGO, this TLC blog, our Teaching and Learning HUB, new Humanities Collaborative, and much more.

In addition to our own on-campus initiatives, online resources based at other institutions can also augment our efforts to hone our approaches to teaching. One excellent example is Carnegie Mellon University’s Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence and Educational Innovation. This thoughtfully designed site includes resources for course design and teaching, assessing both teaching and learning, education and technology, and solving teaching problems. This latter topic’s page breaks down the problem-solving process into three virtual steps: identification of problems by category, followed by identification of possible reasons, and ending with a set of potential strategies for addressing each possible reason for the problem. Teaching in higher education is often a puzzle for us disciplinary experts; some call it one of those wicked problems. The Eberly Center website provides us with a well-organized set of practical virtual tools for approaching our questions about teaching and learning.

We have now included The Eberly Center on our Teaching and Learning HUB’s Toolkits page. While you visit the page, take a moment to explore UP’s other resources for becoming a more reflective teacher at the college level.

Jeffrey White is an instructor of German and the Learning Commons administrator in Buckley Center 163. To discuss with Jeffrey topics on teaching and learning or how your students can practice and enhance their learning in the Learning Commons, contact him at x7141 or via email at white@up.edu.

By

Learning Commons hosts Northwest CRLA at UP, May 11-12

The Northwest College Reading and Learning Association conference is just around the corner from May 11-12 at the University of Portland. Register today at www.nwcrla.com.  Our theme is “Blazing a Trail for Student Success.” On the Friday afternoon, Leonard Geddes of the LearnWell Projects will lead a three-hour workshop Preconditions for Learning: Establishing the Proper Infrastructure for Academic Success.

Saturday’s line-up includes Leonard Geddes’  keynote address Preconditions for Learning: Essential Infrastructure for Student Success followed by several breakout sessions for learning assistance directors and staff, tutors, academic coaches, and faculty. A sampling of our sessions includes:

Strand: Learning Assistance Centers and Peer Assistance Programs

  • Blending Methods: Combining Evidence-based Learning Strategies with Academic Coaching Methods for Student Success
  • If You Build It, They Will Come (That’s a Lie. You Need to Meet Folks Where They’re at.)
  • Peers Researching the Impact of Peers in Student Learning: Insights from a Student Research Team Examining the Peer Mentoring Experience at Portland State University
  • Approaches to Tutor Training and Math Center Programming

Strand: Academic Coaching and Tutoring Techniques

  • Navigating Resources and Coaching Study Skills to Meet College Expectations for Under-Prepared Students for Students Who Think Their Skills are Adequate
  • Emotional Intelligence Blazes a Successful Path Toward Learning
  • Incorporating Active Learning Strategies into Tutor Training

Strand: Equity and Inclusion

  • Creating Inclusive Spaces for Learning through Naming and Navigating Microaggressions
  • Disability Identity: Student Development, Policy, and Practice
  • Digital Learning Center Accessibility: Practical Solutions for Student Success
  • Modeling and Cultivating Intercultural Leadership through Training and Professional Development
  • Blazing a Cultural Bridge for International Student Success

Strand: Teaching and Learning Instructional Strategies

  • Enhancing College Student Success with Writing Studios
  • Trust-building in the Asynchronous OWL

The Northwest CRLA has a discount rate for students and part-time staff, so that everyone has the chance to improve their programs and practices.

Please note that space is limited for Leonard Geddes’ Friday workshops, so register now at www.nwcrla.com. For more information, please contact Jeffrey White, Learning Commons Administrator and Northwest CRLA Treasurer, at white@up.edu.

By

“…and I was happy not to finish what I had intended.”

Last week, Lars Larson challenged us to integrate interleaving into our courses, basing his proposal on principles found in Brown, Roediger, and McDaniel’s Make it Stick (2014). One simple approach to interleaving is to bridge the introduction of material over two classes while also working on a different topic or concept. Although I know to do this, I sometimes fall for trying to package an important concept into one class session. This occurred last week in my Maximizing Study Abroad course. I had planned to have students explain and apply material from a book chapter on Milton Bennett’s Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) through discussion and in-class group work. Since we had just returned from spring break, I also used the beginning of the hour for students to recall what they had been learning prior to the break. This took a bit longer than I expected, as did our group work, and by the end of the hour, we were not done with my lesson plan. As I gathered my things at the end of class, I realized how happy I was not to have finished my intended plan. I could now interleave the material by having students read over the week for the next topic on making cultural inferences and then guiding students the next week to recall Bennett’s DMIS and continue committing it more deeply to memory through elaboration and application.

But why interleave learning? The authors of Make it Stick cite studies that indicate the benefits of interleaving for retrieval of past learned material and developing the ability to discriminate between different kinds of concepts and problems. Interleaving our subject matter also supports effortful learning and what they refer to as “distributed practice” or learning that is spaced out over time. The opposite of distributed practice is massed practice, which includes trying to learn material in one block, as in my original lesson plan, or through cramming, which unfortunately is likely to happen on campus for some students in about a month. James Lang (2016) also discusses interleaving in his recent Small Teaching and cites supporting research findings from math and language learning. He suggests models for shifting from blocked class sessions to interleaved class sessions. Again, the key to interleaving is not finishing a topic or concept before introducing another. For example (Lang, 2016, p. 79):

From Blocked Class Sessions

Monday: Topic A, Problem-Solving Session

Wednesday: Topic B, Problem-Solving Session

Friday: Topic C, Problem-Solving Session, Quiz

To Interleaved Class Sessions

Monday: Topic A, Problem-Solving Session, Topic B

Wednesday: Topic B, Problem-Solving Session, Topic C

Friday: Topic C, Problem-Solving Session, Review or Quiz

Lang notes that students may perceive interleaved learning as moving more slowly, but he cites both laboratory and classroom research that indicates better retention and recall among learners who practice interleaving. Applying interleaving also promotes relating concepts to each other in the classroom and through assessments.

Like the authors of Make it Stick, Lang also promotes frequent low-stakes quizzing and other retrieval practices, such as the following quick classroom assessment techniques:

  • Opening questions that prompt students to remind us what we were working on in the last class session;
  • Closing activities such as a minute paper in which student list key take-aways or their own questions from the day;
  • Closing a session through a short quiz or solving a final problem;
  • Eliciting responses that connect the new topic to some other aspect of the course material.

By engaging students in retrieval practice within an interleaved classroom, we will increase the likelihood of their ability to recall and discriminate concepts, connections, and applications of the material we teach into the future.

As we embrace Lars’ challenge from last week, we can use some of the above approaches to integrate interleaving into your course and lesson plans. For example, when I meet with my Maximizing Study Abroad class next, we will (1) finish some work on Bennett’s intercultural sensitivity scale, (2) interleave it with questioning how it might connect to stages of cultural adjustment, and then (3) move on to the first stage of learning about making cultural inferences.

If you would like to discuss interleaving teaching and learning, please feel free to contact me at white@up.edu.

Jeffrey White is an instructor of German and the Learning Commons administrator in Buckley Center 163. To discuss with Jeffrey how your students can practice and enhance their learning the Learning Commons, contact him at x7141.