Student Learning II: Case Studies, Problem-Based Learning and the 3 Ps

Ben Scholars Institute

December 8, 2006

Overview

• Brief Introduction to BioQUEST and 3Ps

• Small group activity addressing the potential impact of technologies on teaching and learning

• Cases and Problem Spaces as instructional strategies

• Challenges as we move forward

The BioQUEST Curriculum Consortium Community

BioQUEST Curriculum Consortium’s

3 P’s:

Problem PosingProblem SolvingPersuading Peers

Michael is a structural biologist at Stanford UniversityQuote is from Naturejobs 389, 25 September 1997, 420 (1997)

Using Technology To Solve Problems

Technological advances support progress because they remove barriers to traditionally difficult tasks.

What are the primary teaching/learning problems that you see technology helping you overcome? How does technology allow you to teach better and allow students to learn more effectively?

Activity Structure

• Groups of 3 (heterogeneous)• 3 minutes on individual brainstorming• 5 minutes on group brainstorming

(not serial presentation)• 5 minutes on collaborative production of a

representation of your ideas• 3 minutes on individual reflection• Sharing

Task

Represent your “model” of the teaching/learning process and indicate ways that uses of technology can contribute to student understanding.

Technology supports pedagogical strategies.

Pedagogy reflects our assumptions about teaching and learning.

Thus - if we don’t revisit our assumptions about teaching and learning it is very different to update our pedagogy.

Creating inquiry opportunities

Biological Principles

Data Sets

Analysis Tools

Establishing a Problem Space

Creating problem spaces that provide a rich context for using bioinformatics data and tools allows students to focus on using their understanding of biology to investigate meaningful questions.

Biological Principles

Data Sets

Analysis Tools

ProblemSpace

Investigative Cases

• Opportunities to engage students with applications of biological knowledge

• A variety of format exist for structuring tasks and providing information.

• They share several features including:– Contextualizing applications of knowledge– Provide multiple/flexible solution paths– Shift responsibility for learning to students

Open Funnel Case Model

Rich Scenario

ToolsData resourcesPerspectives

Divergent Outcomes

Epistemic discourse vs. epistemological practicesHogan, 2000; Sandoval & Morrison, 2003

Scaffolding argumentationSandoval & Reiser, 2004

Invention to support future learningSchwartz & Martin, 2004

Misconceptions/conceptual changePosner, Strike, & Hewson, 1982

Foregrounding epistemology

Technology is not a solutionTechnology is an amplifier

There is a danger that the integration of new technologies will further reify practices that have been shown to be ineffective.

Technology should be used to make learning easy and fun

We all learn to “code-switch” so that we can participate in multiple cultures. We have the responsibility of establishing the science classroom culture.

Technology makes it easier to present information in a way that students understand

The logic of disciplinary understanding that we have internalized is a rational reconstruction and does not necessarily represent the process of learning. It is a product of learning

Challenge for BEN:Balance the twin goals of providing easy access and transformative tools

One involves working within our existing assumptions and the other involves challenging them.

Take away points

Teaching for understanding involves explicitly addressing features of disciplinary practice.

Important features of disciplinary practices are tied to the details of making knowledge claims.

Technology itself does not shortcut the challenge of teaching for understanding.

Moving in this direction will require epistemological, methodological and ontological insights into the discipline (faculty and students).