The characteristics of appropriately worded behavioral objectives and the advantages for curriculum design and implementation of a clear specification of objectives in advance of any teaching or testing have been articulated by a number of people, for example, Mager, Popham, and Sullivan. Essentially, a behavioral objective is a statement or description of intent. It is not, however, a statement of what a teacher intends to do, but rather, a statement of what the teacher intends that the student will be able to do or produce at the conclusion of some period of instruction.
A properly stated behavioral objective must describe without ambiguity the nature of learner behavior or product to be measured. Two major advantages are claimed for behavioral objectives. First, they provide clear end points toward which all can strive; and second, because they focus on expected terminal performance of students (what students are expected to be able to do), they suggest methods of assessing the extent to which objectives have been realized. The apparent logic of such an approach is obvious to all; to argue against behavioral objectives would seem to be to argue for ambiguity, if not irrationality. Nevertheless, a number of people have drawn attention to some of the difficulties and possible hazards of the approach, for example, Atkin,5 Eisner,6 and this author. It is not my intention here to go over old ground; however, I do wish to draw attention to some very serious dangers in evaluating programs from the simple instructional model implied in the behavioral approach.
In an effort to measure the effectiveness of faculty development courses promoting student engagement, the faculty
development unit of Penn State’s Online Campus conducted a pilot study within a large online Bachelor of Science in Business (BSB) program. In all, 2,296 students were surveyed in the spring and summer semesters of 2014 in order to seek their perspectives on (1) the extent of their engagement in the courses and (2) the degree to which their instructors promoted their
engagement. The survey comprised three sub-scales: the first and third sub-scales addressed instructional design aspects of the course, and the second sub-scale addressed attitudes and behaviors whereby the instructors promoted student engagement. The results showed a significant difference on the second sub-scale (sig = 0.003) at the .05 level, indicating that students rated instructors with professional development higher on instructor behaviors that engaged them in their
courses than those instructors who received no professional development. There were no significant differences found for the first and third sub-scales indicating that the instructional design aspects of the courses under investigation were not influenced by instructors’ professional development. Qualitative data showed that three quarters of the students who had instructors whose background included professional development geared to encouraging student engagement felt that their courses had engaged them. Future research will focus on increasing the response rate and exploring in more depth both the instructional design and qualitative aspects of student engagement.
On the surface America’s public commitment to provide access to any individual who seeks entry to postsecondary education seems to be working. Our higher education system enjoys one of the highest participation rates in the world. More than 16 million students currently enroll in public and private two and four-year colleges and universities in the United States. In the past 20 years, enrollments have grown over 25 percent; the proportion of high school graduates entering college immediately after high school has increased from 49 percent in 1980 to over 68 percent today. More importantly, the gap in access between high and low-income youth has shrunk as greater numbers of economically disadvantaged students have enrolled in college; the number entering college immediately after high school having increased by over 60 percent since 1970. By any count, access to higher education for low-income students is greater today than ever.
• Ontario has the world’s third-highest post-secondary attainment rate for young adults (ages 25 to 34). It produces more degrees per capita than the U.S. and most other countries and up to three times as many career-oriented diplomas and trades certificates. Nonetheless, those with disabilities and aboriginal people have a lower share of degrees.
• While 28 per cent of Americans who attend post-secondary institutions eventually drop out without a credential, the Canadian rate is much lower (seven per cent).
• In 2012, Ontario certified 57 per cent as many trades persons as a share of employment as the rest of Canada.
• Canada’s essential skills ratings for young adults are better than the advanced country average, but behind the Nordic countries, Japan and Korea. However, only 15 per cent at the lowest literacy level are engaged in job-related adult education each year.
Matching skills to jobs
• Ontario’s trades and diploma graduates play a key role in exports (manufacturing, resources and tourism), energy, infrastructure, real estate and health care. Typically, smaller communities rely more heavily on diploma and trades certificate holders – as business owners and employees.
• Ontario’s ability to match skills to job opportunities is above the advanced country average. But it is behind three provinces and 10 countries, notably Switzerland and Germany, which are highly regarded for their ability to match educational programs with employer requirements.
New research at the University of Warwick demonstrates two shortcomings with the current benchmarking of internationalisation: they are based purely on structural measures and they use a simple bi-polar distinction between home and international students. There are several dangers in relying on these measures: Structural internationalisation ≠ Student satisfaction: Latest research shows that in the UK, the lower the proportion of UK students, the less satisfied students of all backgrounds are. This does not mean that structural internationalisation should be avoided; on the contrary, students appreciate the value of an 'internationalisation' experience, so what we need is an agenda for integration.
The scientific study of human learning and memory is now more than 125 years old. Psychologists have conducted thou- sands of experiments, correlational analyses, and field studies during this time, in addition to other research conducted by those from
neighboring fields. A huge knowledge base has been carefully built up over the decades.
Given this backdrop, we may ask ourselves: What great changes in education have resulted from this huge research base? How has the scientific study of learning and memory changed practices in education from those of, say, a century ago? Have we succeeded in building a translational educational science to rival medical science (in which biological knowledge is translated into medical practice) or types of engineering (in which, e.g., basic knowledge in chemistry is translated into products through chemical engineering)?
Education is overloaded with programs and data. The growth of digital power has aided and abetted the spread of accountability-driven data—adequate yearly progress, test results for every child in every grade, common core standards, formative and summative assessments galore. Each data set shows a full continuum from below standard to exceed standards. Educators need to be able to put FACES on the data at all points on the continuum and, to know what to do to help individual children behind the statistical mask.
If you’re interested in using technology tools to enhance your teaching, it’s easy to get overwhelmed by the mountain of information out there. To make matters worse, much of it is either highly technical or simply not very practical for the college classroom. Teaching with Technology: Tools and Strategies to Improve Student Learning approaches teaching technologies from your perspective — discussing what works, what doesn’t, and how to implement the best ideas in the best ways.
These articles were written by John Orlando, PhD, program director at Norwich University, as part of the Teaching with Technology column on Faculty Focus. You’ll find the articles are loaded with practical information as well as links to valuable resources. Articles in the report include:
• Using VoiceThread to Build Student Engagement
• Wikipedia in the Classroom: Tips for Effective Use
• Blogging to Improve Student Learning: Tips and Tools for Getting Started
• Prezi: A Better Way of Doing Presentations
• Using Polling and Smartphones to Keep Students Engaged
Whether the courses you teach are face-to-face, online, blended, or all of the above, this report explains effective ways to incorporate technology into your courses to create a rich learning experience for students, and a rewarding teaching experience for you.
The aim of this paper is to develop and extend a social realist critique of competency based training (CBT). Its key argument is that knowledge must be placed at the centre of curriculum, and that because CBT does not do this, it excludes working class students from access to powerful knowledge. Developing this argument reveals that constructivist critiques of CBT not only miss the point, they are part of the problem. The paper argues that this is because the relationship between constructivism and instrumentalism structured the development of CBT in the vocational education and training (VET) sector in Australia, even though they are distinct theoretical approaches to curriculum. Constructivist discourses were appropriated and reworked through the prism of instrumentalism, thereby contributing to the justification and legitimation of CBT, but also to its continuing theorisation and development. The basis for the appropriation of constructivism by CBT is that both emphasise the contextual, situated and problem-oriented nature of knowledge creation and learning and in so doing, sacrifice the complexity and depth of theoretical knowledge in curriculum in favour of ‘authentic’ learning in the workplace. Consequently, in developing its critique of CBT and the instrumentalist learning theories that underpin it, constructivism misses the main point, which is that theoretical knowledge must be placed at the centre of curriculum in all sectors of education, and that access to knowledge is the raison d’être of education (Young 2008).
This report focuses on recent Ontario education policies. It is a policy audit of the present state of the public school system in Ontario and a proposal for provincial education policies that will best serve the students of Ontario. Following the most tumultuous decade in Ontario educational history, and seven years after the release of the report of the Royal Commission on Learning,1 we believe it is necessary to examine where Ontario education is now and where the province should be headed in the future.
In Canada, Aboriginal postsecondary enrolment and completion rates are significantly lower than those of non-Aboriginals (Canadian Millenium Scholarship Foundation, 2004; Mendelson, 2006). This is most evident in disciplines involving science and mathematics (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 2005). Moreover, Aboriginal student achievement in K – Grade 12 mathematics courses is significantly lower than those of non-Aboriginal students (Neel, 2007). In the contemporary Canadian context of low Aboriginal participation and completion rates in postsecondary studies of mathematics, it is important to provide Aboriginal students with experiences of mathematics that foster their interest and ability in the early stages of their schooling (Bourke et al, 1996; Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, 2002).
Similar to the baby boom generation, members of generations X & Y have financial priorities that include home ownership, funding post-secondary education and saving and investing for retirement. Achieving these goals requires a different approach to developing and implementing a financial plan that resonates with generations X & Y.
While budgets are being cut and positions not being refilled, it is no surprise that universities are also beginning to feel the effects of a weakened economy. Student retention has remained a prominent issue in the literature for several decades now, still with no definite answer on why students fail to persist and graduate (Morrow & Ackerman, 2012). In an effort to gain more
insight into this phenomenon, the purpose of this study is to understand retention by assessing resiliency in students who have experienced adverse childhood events. The goal of this study is to identify if resiliency, as a psychosocial factor, influences student persistence in the first year at a university when the student is identified as at-risk (i.e. the student has dealt with an identified past trauma). An agglomeration of Tinto’s Student Integration Model and the Diathesis Stress Model will be used to understand how resilience and psychopathology can affect persistence decisions in the first year. If services can be implemented for students in their first year, it is possible that more students would persist and graduate.
Graduate students have embraced professional development as an integral part of their education, but what about their supervisors and departments? As part of an initiative to reduce completion times the school of graduate studies at the University of Toronto hosted a series of faculty development workshops to optimize supervisory mentorship in graduate student research progress and professional development.
Science is a fundamental part of Canadian culture and society, affecting nearly every aspect of individual and social life. It is a driving force in the economy, catalyzing innovation and creating new goods, services, and industries. It has led to improvements in Canadians’ physical health and well-being. It has made possible new forms of communication and learning, and changed how Canadians interact and relate to one another. It also provides opportunities for leisure and entertainment as Canadians visit science centres, pursue science-related hobbies, or tune in to such television programs as “The Nature of Things” or “Découverte”. Science is also a systematic means of discovery and exploration that enriches our individual and collective understanding of the world and universe around us.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the factors affecting the success of First Nations learners in education in Canada and the types of initiatives required to support the successful transition of First Nations learners to post-secondary. A description of First Nations peoples and a brief overview of the historical context of education for First Nations in Canada will assist the
reader in understanding the reality of First Nations communities and schools, and the impacts on First Nation learners. It is these experiences that prompt the design, development and delivery of specialized programs and services required to assist First Nations students with their transitions to post-
secondary education.
Post-secondary education is effectively a requirement to succeed in today’s labour market. Unfortunately, while the demand for education has increased, public funding has failed to keep up. Public funding shortfalls have resulted in a significant growth of costs that have been downloaded onto individual students, namely in the form of high tuition fees. From 1990 to 2014, national average tuition fees have seen an inflation-adjusted increase of over 155%. In Ontario, tuition fees have increased over 180%.
For most students—often having spent little time fully active in the workforce—funding their education has become increasingly difficult. Many students must now take on significant levels of debt to pay for their education. Students requiring a Canada Student Loan now graduate with an average debt of over $28,000.
Relying on debt to finance education means the full impact of high tuition fees is delayed until after graduation—when it is then compounded by interest. This impact is now exacerbated by the effects of the Great Recession and the rising trend of precarious, and even unpaid, employment. The broader effects of high levels of student debt on both the individual and the general economy are now becoming obvious:
This paper presents the findings from a research study on the implementation of an alternative evaluation strategy into a third-year class, which changed the learning environment by allowing students to choose how they would be evaluated. The specific objective of the study was to determine if the implementation of this evaluation strategy would improve student engagement, the quality of the learning experience and address challenges associated with increased diversity in student capabilities.
During the Winter 2012 and Winter 2013 semesters, PSY3523: Psychologie de la famille (Psychology of the Family) was taught at the University of Ottawa as a course offered to a maximum of 100 students per semester. The course incorporates various teaching methods, including traditional lectures, the use of documentaries and group discussions, as well as student-led mini-classes. The course implemented an evaluation strategy that combined traditional examinations (midterm and final exams) with the option of completing a term project. If students elected to complete a term project, they could choose from two different options (i.e., to prepare a mini-class or to participate in the Community Service Learning program at the University of Ottawa). Additionally, teaching assistant (TA)-led tutorials were scheduled throughout the semester to help students succeed in both the traditional examinations and the term project. Finally, material presented in the tutorials, as well as weekly quizzes, were made available online for students to consult as needed throughout the semester to support their engagement and success in the course.
This handbook is intended to serve as a resource for faculty, staff, academic leaders and education developers engaged in program and course design/review, and the assessment of program-level learning outcomes for program improvement. The assessment of learning outcomes at the program-level can assist in making improvements to curricula, teaching and assessments plans.
Every professor has had one: the incredible disappearing student. Mine was "James," a talented and innovative thinker who had great things to say in class until he vanished, about halfway through the semester. He didn’t submit his paper. He didn’t show up in office hours. He didn’t respond to my emails. He was just gone. Poof.
Students like James are increasingly common at colleges and universities. Report after report has shown that undergraduates today experience more anxiety and stress than ever before. In extreme cases, the "pressure of perfection" can have tragic consequences. Nationally, suicide rates for 15- to 24-year-olds have risen, and suicide remains the second-leading cause of death for college students.