1 But It's Harder This Way Denise Kirkpatrick, Richard Fuller, Denise Chalmers Edith Cowan University Abstract One of the challenges faced by university students concerns the management of their study. Many students find that they need to acquire new learning and study strategies in order to cope with the requirements of university. While some students are able to learn new strategies or adapt old strategies, most do not do so. It seems appropriate that universitities should provide students with assistance to learn and develop appropriate study strategies and skills to meet the requirements of university study. A number of such courses have been offered in universities but there is little evidence to show that these courses have been effective. This paper reports the development and implementation of a program of instruction which aimed to teach students relevant skills and strategies in the context of a first year (undergraduate) Education unit. The program is part of a larger research project investigating students' goals and approaches to study (Chalmers, Fuller & Kirkpatrick, 1993). Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Fremantle, Western Australia, 22 - 25 November, 1993 Introduction This paper presents a description of an instructional program designed to teach first year university students learning strategies, in the context of instruction in a regular subject class. This program was developed and implemented as part of a larger research study which investigated students' learning goals and their approaches to study. The literature relating to cognitive and learning strategies has done much to describe the strategies that learners use, and the ways in they utilise strategies in particular situations (see Weinstein & Mayer, 1986). A notable omission in the literature relates to the development of programs of instruction in learning strategies, particularly instruction that occurs in the context of subject instruction. In general, instructional practices at university are predicated on several assumptions about the nature of learning and the learner. One of these is that gaining university entrance ensures that all students have the necessary learning strategies to learn effectively from the university experience. It seems that the assumption that all students will enter university equipped with the range of skills and strategies required to learn effectively is ill founded. Increasingly there are a number of students who enter university without the range of skills and learning strategies required for them to learn effectively. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of students entering university via less traditional entrance procedures. These students may either not have had recent school/educational experience, or their educational experiences may be different from those of the traditional school leaver. Even successful secondary school experience may not prepare students adequately for the nature of the learning experiences that they will encounter in the university setting. Instructional techniques at university, traditionally, have been based on beliefs about the value of transmitted knowledge and the assumption that the learner has the skills to learn relatively independently. As a consequence, attempts to teach students using materials and teaching strategies based on such expectations are unlikely to be successful. In response to this we designed a program of instruction which incorporated the implicit and explicit teaching of a range of learning strategies within an existing unit of study at first year level in Education. Rationale Our goal was to adapt two existing first year level units of study in Education, in a way that would help students become more flexible and strategic learners. Strategic or self regulated learners are goal oriented and purposeful, incorporating a variety of strategic approaches (Lindner & Harris, 1992). In order to operate as strategic learners students must possess declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge. Declarative knowledge is conventionally described as "knowing what", that is, students must know what strategies are available. In addition to this they must also know how to use the strategies, that is, they must have procedural knowledge. It has been suggested that this procedural knowledge may include a dimension described as strategic knowledge, or potentially knowing how as opposed to actually knowing and being able to perform the skill. Finally, learners must possess relevant conditional knowledge, they must have control of the executive procedures that concern the overall management of learning and action, they must know when and why to use particular strategies (Dansereau, 1978, Pintrich, 1988). Not only must students know that there are strategies which can be used to perform a particular cognitive or learning task, they must know how to use the strategies, select the most appropriate strategy for the task and context, and monitor the extent of their successful performance of the task. It is this third aspect of students' cognitive knowledge that allows them to function flexibly and adaptively, rather than mechanistically applying the same strategy to all tasks. Conventional study skills instruction tends to teach students a set of strategies (declarative knowledge) and how to use them (procedural knowledge). In some cases conditional knowledge may be implied but it is generally neglected (Weinstein & Mayer, 1986). While it is possible for students to learn using rote memorisation techniques, this type of approach is likely to result in only short term memorisation. Students may be very successful at retaining information long enough to pass an exam but not very skilled at maintaining that knowledge in long term memory. Generally, educators would agree that their aim is to produce lasting learning gains in their students and culturally, there is greater value Placed on more meaningful learning, or learning with understanding. In a professionally oriented course such as the teacher education program, the learning that occurs in all stages of the course is relevant to the students' future professional life. This is an additional incentive for encouraging students to learn the course content in a manner that will allow them to successfully store and retrieve relevant knowledge in their long term memory. To achieve this, it is necessary for students to create meaningful connections between what they already know and what they are attempting to learn. This type of learning requires students to use some form of elaboration which will make the new information more personally meaningful. The linking of new information is facilitated by consciously focusing on what students already know- their prior knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, expectations and values. Relating what is to be learned to what is already known can be done in a number of ways. Weinstein et al (1989) suggest that techniques such as paraphrasing, summarising in our own words, transforming information to another form such as a chart or matrix, using compare and contrast methods, drawing inferences and conclusions and trying to teach another person what we are trying to learn are useful elaboration strategies. The wider the repertoire of strategies that students can develop, the greater the variety of tasks they can perform, and the more flexibly they can function as learners. Like any procedural skill the learning of these strategies requires opportunities for practice and feedback. Learning strategies are those behaviours or thoughts that facilitate learning (Weinstein & Mayer, 1986). There is substantial support for the belief that students can be taught learning strategies (Perkins et al., 1989, Pressley et al., 1990) and that they learn these most effectively when at least some of the instruction takes place in subject matter classes. Conventional study skills instruction frequently occurs in an isolated context so that students are taught a set of generic strategies but there is little attention to facilitating transfer to real learning situations. Literature on the teaching of learning and study skills presents cases for both the implicit and explicit teaching of these skills (Naveh-Benjamin & Lin, 1987). Guiding our program design were the beliefs that students actively construct their own knowledge and that their background experiences play an important role in the process of this knowledge construction. We also believed that the instructor can provide a valuable and expert model in the use of strategies and the structuring of knowledge, and that the structuring of the learning experience can play an important role in the learning process. Additionally the belief that learning is a social activity, and that learner talk plays a valuable role in learning affected our decision to include a substantial number of group activities. Our program was designed to teach students the three types of knowledge about learning strategies - declarative, procedural and conditional, using implicit and explicit instructional approaches. This knowledge was to be taught at the same time as instruction in the substantive content of the unit was taking place. The strategies would be taught in a specific learning context. Our decision to do so reflected our beliefs about how students learn. In keeping with our beliefs about effective learning we wanted to create a range of learning experiences which went beyond the conventional use of expository teaching. By using a range of teaching strategies with a variety of learning activities constructed on a solid base of learning theory we believed that we could facilitate students' learning about the substantive content of the unit and about themselves as learners. While there were some skills that we considered were most appropriately taught using explicit instruction, our aim was to encourage students to become more independent learners by involving them in learning experiences where they were actively involved in their learning, adapting existing strategies and creating new strategies to assist in the successful completion of a task. We wanted to build up students' repertoire of strategies, increase their skill in applying and using these strategies to complete tasks, and to increase their knowledge and expertise in selecting the most appropriate strategy for the situation and task. Context of the Program The program was implemented in two Education Studies units, each of one semester duration. These were compulsory units taken in first and second semester by all (primary and secondary) first year students in the Bachelor of Arts (Education) course. A total of 500 students were enrolled in each unit and the first semester program was taught to 75 students in three class groups. Students in the groups which were taught using the program included primary and secondary education students. In second semester two class groups were taught according to the program. These groups comprised 50 students enrolled in the secondary education program. Students in all groups included school leavers and mature age students from a range of subject majors. The units each required four hours per week of contact time and this comprised a one hour mass lecture attended by all first year students, immediately followed by a one hour class session and, later in the week, a two hour class session . Mass lectures presented the central unit content which in first semester (Education 1) included teaching skills and human development. Unit content in second semester (Education 2) focused on the further development of teaching skills, and theories of learning and teaching. Class sessions normally expanded on the ideas presented in the lecture and included activities that developed the ideas presented in the lecture session. The intention of the small class sessions was to allow the opportunity for information presented in the lecture to be related to the local scene and to provide opportunities for the investigation of local and practical applications of the content. These class sessions were taken by a number of instructors who used a range of instructional approaches. Each unit was of one semester duration (thirteen weeks) including an additional two week teaching practice component. Both units included three assessment points. In first semester students submitted two assignments and sat an end of semester examination. The first assignment was related to teaching skills component and included lesson planning prior to the practice period, the second assignment was an essay question related to developmental theory and the examination covered all content for the semester and included multiple choice and essay questions. Evaluation in second semester included a mid-semester multiple choice test, a written paper accompanied by a group tutorial presentation and a final examination comprising essay and multiple choice questions. All assignments were independently marked according to agreed criteria including process and product variables and students received a detailed marking guide with comments along with their marked assignments. Aims of the program The program aimed to achieve the following outcomes: to develop students' awareness of themselves as learners, including awareness of their goals, expectations, use of strategies; to increase students' knowledge of the range of learning strategies available; to improve students' performance of appropriate learning strategies; to develop students' skills in monitoring their own performance of learning strategies and adapting strategies to suit personal need and situation. Our desired outcomes centred on the development of particular student behaviours which we believed would enable them to learn more effectively by adopting a more strategic approach to the tasks that they encountered. By learning about their own approaches to academic tasks students would be able to develop skills to monitor, reflect, intervene and select the most appropriate way to achieve their learning goals. As many students were unlikely to have the learning strategies to achieve these outcomes we believed that instruction in the nature and use of such strategies would be beneficial (Biggs, 1982). Designing the Program In designing the program we began by considering the objectives of the unit, articulating our own beliefs about learning, and identifying the major cognitive tasks that students were required to complete and the cognitive strategies necessary to perform those tasks successfully. Using these combined objectives we identified strategic places in the existing unit program where particular skills were required. Strategies which related to being a student at university and dealing with the demands of the system were considered necessary at the beginning of the year, the occurrence of assignments suggested the need for instruction in assignment related strategies, and examination strategies were appropriate towards the end of each semester. A study skills inventory adapted from the LASSI inventory (Weinstein & Schulte,1987) was administered at the beginning of each semester and this was used to focus students' attention on their own learning behaviour. In addition such topics as learning theories, metacognition, memory and motivation were directly related to aspects of learner knowledge. By combining the objectives and content of the Education units and the learning strategy objectives we developed a program of instructional activities and learning experiences which would facilitate the development of essential learning strategies and knowledge while students were learning the substantive content of the unit. The program followed certain basic principles to achieve these outcomes. Learning skills would be taught both implicitly and explicitly, they would be taught in context, the strategies featured would relate specifically to studying in Education, and a basic problem solving heuristic would be used to facilitate transfer of application between learning contexts. The program identified student behaviours which we believed were necessary for students to operate successfully in the academic setting of Education 1 and 2. These behaviours were classified under the headings: assessment behaviours including assignment and exam behaviours and learning situation behaviours including personal study, class session and lecture behaviours. This classification was of assistance when organising strategies into the appropriate section of the unit outline. A feature of the program was that strategies would be taught in context and that different learning strategies should be taught for appropriate tasks (Levin, 1986). Mc Keachie, Pintrich, Lin and Smith (1987) have suggested a taxonomy of learning strategies classified into three main categories: cognitive strategies which include rehearsal, elaboration and organisational strategies; metacognitive strategies including planning, monitoring and regulating strategies and resource management strategies including time management, study environment management, effort management and support of others. The strategies suggested by McKeachie et al match closely the behaviours which were identified as critical for first year Education students. The program included instruction in, and the application of strategies from each of the three categories. Included in cognitive strategies are rehearsal strategies which are related to attention and encoding as the learner brings information to working memory. These strategies may be simple or complex and include such behaviours as taking notes while reading or underlining or highlighting sections of text. The program included explicit instruction in a range of note making methods and the active encouragement of note making and other reading rehearsal strategies. Such strategies are most effective when used for activation of information in working memory rather than the acquisition of new information (Weinstein and Mayer, 1986). In order to assist students in constructing internal connections between information and to facilitate the integration of new information with prior knowledge, elaboration strategies were included in the program. Students were required to write summaries, paraphrase ideas, explain to others, and construct their own notes and alternative forms of representing information (eg concept maps). Organisational strategies assist the learner in the selection of appropriate information and the construction of connections among the information to be learned. Networking has been identified as by Dansereau (1978) as effective in identifying connections among the main ideas in a passage of text by classifying links between ideas. A variation of networking was used with students to identify relationships between ideas in both text and lecture information. This technique was also used to identify the links between ideas across the whole unit. The area of metacognitive strategies has also been identified as being a significant part of learner knowledge. It has been suggested that good learners engage in more planning and metacognitive activities than poor learners (Jacobs & Paris, 1987, Brown, 1987, Pressley, 1986). Students were encouraged to develop planning strategies through the use of activities in which they set goals for various tasks, analysed task requirements, and generated questions before reading the text or attending lectures. Monitoring activities are also an important part of metacognition which assist the learner in understanding material and integrating it with prior knowledge. Students were instructed in test taking strategies, and monitoring their comprehension while reading or listening to lectures. The monitoring aspect of assignment preparation and performance was also taught explicitly and supported by activities where students monitored their assignment progress, and students were encouraged to monitor their performance over the course of the unit. The final aspect of metacognition in which students were instructed was the related area of self regulation activities. Again these activities related to assignment preparation, test preparation and performance and overall unit progress. At a micro level students were encouraged to utilise self regulation strategies while reading text, performing academic tasks and during lectures. Students were also taught a number of strategies related to the management of such resources as time, themselves, peers and instructors. Students were encouraged to develop a study schedule and to monitor their use of time , particularly in relation to assignment and examination preparation. These activities involved elements of planning and self regulation and were linked with other activities relating to these strategies.. The use of others, including peers and staff was addressed through activities, discussion and information provision. Students were encouraged to reflect on their management of effort and to become aware of the role of effort in becoming a self regulated learner. Research has suggested that students' background knowledge or prior experience plays a critical role in the success with which they learn the content of a new unit (Anderson, 1985, Gagne, 1985). Formost students this was their first experience in a university setting and first exposure to the subject content of Education. We decided that the lecturers would adopt the role of expert in the field, modelling their own learning strategies and making explicit their own structuring of the content. Instructional approaches were designed to allow for direct instruction of the strategies including modelling and verbalisation of the approach taken by the lecturer and implicit instruction in other strategies where students worked on tasks that allowed them to develop their own strategies. As much as possible activities were designed that required students to be actively, cognitively involved in working with the content and ideas giving them the opportunity to construct their own structure of the knowledge in the subject. Extensive instructor verbalisation and staff student discussion allowed students opportunity to monitor their structuring of knowledge. Instruction Instruction occurred in the single hour class session following the mass lecture and in the later two hour class session. The outline of the unit content and program is provided in Appendix 1. Activities in the class session which followed the lecture comprised a lecture review focusing on students' notes from the lecture and including discussion of the ideas identified by students as salient, their methods of doing so, and reasons for selection of particular points. In this section the lecturer frequently verbalised the way in which he or she had identified particular features of the lecture as being relevant or important and students were required to compare their lecture notes with those of their peers and to compare key points and note taking strategies. This served also to review the content involved, clarifying students' understanding of the key ideas and the relationships of new ideas to those presented in previous classes. The two hour class session was used to explore ideas raised in the lecture and to give students the opportunity to work with the content for the week. Activities in this session included frequent use of group activities where students were required to apply the subject theory to classroom situations. In addition to this the final thirty minutes of the class session was spent in explicit instruction in the use of a problem solving heuristic and the application of that heuristic to students' approaches to particular assessment situations. The heuristic presented was based on Polya's problem solving model (1957) and included four steps: Identify, Plan, Monitor and Check. This provides a step of general steps applicable across arange of situations This was selected as we believed that this would facilitate the development of a range of necessary general cognitive strategies as well as being applicable to a range of academic and real life situations. The problem solving heuristic was utilised in relation to students' assignments, their mid-semester test and preparation for their final examinations. The instructional approach used here was of direct instruction in the heuristic with the lecturer modelling the use of it in particular situations, verbalisation of the process and student use of the heuristic in their own situation. The lecturing staff involved met weekly to review class sessions and to discuss the success of activities. Modifications were made continuously as incidental events arose or spontaneous teaching opportunities presented themselves. While there was a mutually agreed upon series of activities and instruction, each class was taught with minor changes resulting from the individual lecturer's personal preference for particular approaches. Students in the classes which were taught according to the program underwent the same assessment procedures as all other students in the unit. The second semester program At the conclusion of first semester the lecturers involved met and reviewed the program. The results of the study skills inventory were considered along with students' performance in each of the assessment tasks. Throughout the semester students' responses to activities and exercises had been sought, and records of students' comments and feedback including unit evaluations were considered in the planing for second semester. The effectiveness of particular strategy instruction and instructional activities from an instructor's perspective were reviewed and decisions were made regarding the inclusion of particular strategies in the program for second semester. The second semester program was developed by matching desired strategies with unit content, taking into consideration student and instructor responses to the first semester program. Following normal procedure, whereby lecturers took responsibility for different class groups in second semester, the program was continued with different groups of students in second semester. The second semester program was implemented with only two groups of first year Education students. As students had experienced one semester of university life the general strategies relating to dealing with the system and finding one's way around university were not included in the second semester program. However, these were replaced by strategies dealing with gaining assistance and greater emphasis on monitoring performance and using feedback. As students had also experienced the content of the subject, Education this prior experience and background knowledge was acknowledged. The lecturer continued to adop the role of Education "expert" but greater emphasis was placed on identifying and acknowledging the knowledge that students brought with them to the unit. Attention was focused on facilitating students' organisation of this knowledge in a manner that resembled the structure of the "expert" (Naveh-Benjamin, McKeachie, Lin & Tucker, 1986). The different assessment points in second semester required some changes to the manner of presentation. Each student was responsible for tutorial presentation in the class session. This resulted in five of the two hour class sessions in which the larger part of the class session was taken by students. This was seen as supporting the intentions of the program as the teaching of new information to others has been identified as a valuable elaboration strategy in the learning of new knowledge. This tutorial also included the submission of a written paper so that students were encouraged to apply the heuristic to the task of developing the tutorial presentation and paper. The inclusion of a mid-semester test introduced an additional form of evaluation for which students needed to develop preparation and performance strategies. Throughout second semester students were given a weekly study or review question that related to that week's topic. Students were encouraged to use these questions to help them structure their revision and study and these were used as the focus for some class sessions. Conclusion Student responses to the program varied. Not surprisingly there was some degree of resistance as some students perceived that they were being required to work "harder" than students in other classes. There were requests, particularly early in the semester for the lecturer to "just tell us what we need to know". However a number of students commented that they had never been taught that such strategies were available, or, where they were aware of the existence of strategies, they did not know how to use them effectively. Students' comments indicated that they realised, not only were these strategies effective for their own learning but that they could see a use for them when they became teachers and expected their own students to perform similar tasks. There was some (albeit reluctant) admission that while this approach required more effort on their part it did result in students having a better understanding of the content involved in the unit. This type of comment was more common from members of the second semester groups and it is likely that having some background in the subject made meaningful learning more achievable. Anecdotal evidence from staff suggests that students were generally more involved in the class activities and that their efforts were maintained throughout the semester. Data from a related research project suggest that during the semester that they were involved in the program (Chalmers, Fuller, & Kirkpatrick, 1993), students performed better on assessment tasks including examinations, than students who were not taught according to the program. Staff involved in developing and teaching the program reported positive responses to the approach. Developing the program and related activities was more time consuming than teaching in a traditional manner and class activities required greater instructor involvement, often in the role of model, talking through their own strategic approaches. This caused some discomfort initially and required greater preparation than conventional expository approaches. We found that the discussion about the program, learning activities, and our own teaching approaches allowed us opportunity for reflection on our performance as well as that of the students. Our satisfaction with the program has resulted in the continuation of a modified program with the current group of first year students. The principles of this program have now been applied to other units. This research was supported by a research grant from Edith Cowan University. References Anderson, J. R. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Freeman. Biggs, J. B. & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press. Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert and R. Kluwe (Eds), Metacognition, Motivation and understanding. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. Chalmers, D., Fuller, R. & Kirkpatrick, D. (1993) Everyone wants an A - But will they even get a C? Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education, Fremantle, Western Australia. Dansereau, D. F. (1978). The development of a learning strategy curriculum. In H. F. O'Neill, Jr. (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press. Gagne, E, (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. .BOston: Little Brown. Jacobs, J. & Paris, S. (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychology, 22, 255 - 278. Levin, J. R. (1986). Four cognitive principles of strategy instruction. Educational Psychologist, 21 (1 & 2), 3-17. Lindner, R. H. & Harris, B. (1992). Self regulated learning and academic achievement in college students. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Educational Research Association. Mc Keachie,W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Lin,Y. G. & Smith, D. A. F. (1987). Teaching and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature. National Centre for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Naveh-Benjamin, M. & Lin, Y. G. (1987). Development of cognitive structures in university courses and their relations to students' study skills, anxiety and motivation. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association convention, New York. Naveh-Benjamin, M. McKeachie,W. J., Lin, Y. G. & Tucker, D. (1986). Inferring students' cognitive structure and their development using the "ordered tree technique". Journal of Educational Psychology. 78, 130 - 140. Perkins, D. N., Simmons, R. & Tishman, S. (1989). Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Pintrich, P. (1988). Student learning and college teaching. In R. E. Young & K. E. Eble (Eds), College teaching and learning: Preparing for new commitments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no 33. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. (2nd ed.). Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press. Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21 (1 & 2),139 - 161. Pressley, M., Cariglia-Bull, T. & Snyder, B. (1984) Are there programs that can really teach thinking and learning skills? Contemporary Educational Review, 3, 435-444. Pressley, M., Burkell, J., Cariglia-Bull, T., Lysynchuk, L., McGoldrick, J. A., Schneider, B., Symons, S. & Woloshyn, V. E. (1990). Cognitive strategy instruction. Cambridge, Mass: Brookline Books. Weinstein, C. E., Scott Ridley, D., Dahl, T. & Weber, E. S. (1989). Helping students develop strategies for effective learning. Educational Leadership, Dec /Jan. 17 -19. Weinstein, C. E. & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York, MacMillan. Weinstein, C. E. & Schulte, A. C. (1987). LASSI Learning and study skills inventory. Florida: H & H Publishing Co. Appendix 1 Week Session One Session Two 1 Introduction to unit Beginning & concluding lessons Lesson plans On being a student Personal goals Working with the system Study skills inventory & discussion 2 Teaching skills - Explaining Teaching skills - Explaining Lecture review - compare Assignment analysis notes, Identify purpose Planning Summary statement- key idea of lecture System vs personal goals 3 Objectives and evaluation Objectives and evaluation Lecture notes review Note making from text use of lecturer's structure (in preparation for next Model lecture notes lecture) from framework Model & practise Link to heuristic + Monitor 4. Prac Briefing Teaching resources Questioning skills Questioning skills Lecture notes on the basis Review notes from text of structure prepared from Emphasise monitoring & text pre-reading. Compare & checking phases discuss Note making practice Apply heuristic to practice Identification of main point experience Question generation 5 Classroom Management Lesson planning Structuring/organising Learning from feedback own ideas from lecture notes Self & peer lesson plan review Facilitating personal change TEACHING PRACTICE 6 Human development Physical development Summary & main points Summary worksheet: from lecture Physical development Paragraph writing: Assignment analysis Importance of development Identify key words Plan approach for notes 7 Physical & social development Physical & social development Self concept Self concept No class Lecture review: summary writing, share & compare develop own social development summary sheet Assignment monitoring, note making methods 8 Emotional-social development Emotional-social development Lecture review summary Heuristic Monitor notemaking for Purpose assignment Plan Organisation of ideas in Monitor assignment Final checking of Referencing assignment 9 Cognitive development Cognitive development Lecture review summary Planning for unit review Share & compare Summary sheet development Monitor progress in unit- Points & implications self reflection Multi choice questions Assignment performance Plan for future tasks Discuss use of study review questions 10 Cognitive development Cognitive development Share & compare lecture Review multi choice reviews answers & techniques Review & evaluate methods- Use of study questions to Organisation - guide review Use of charts & tables Revise heuristic Devise a study plan 11 Language development Language development Lecture review Study techniques Study questions as a guide Heuristic - select most for preparation appropriate method for Analysis of questions content & purpose - use of heuristic Practice & preparation 12 Moral development Moral development Review multi choice Analysis of question technique Identification of relevant information Planning an essay answer Personal monitoring of "what I know" 13 Educational aims Review Exam techniques Review heuristic & its uses Practise question analysis Whole class concept map of & planning unit content SEMESTER TWO Week Session One Session Two 1 Unit overview Series of lessons Personal reflection on Awareness of personal study last semester, identify approaches positives & negatives Select tutorial topics - What skills do you need? Reflect on basis for decision Personal goals Heuristic step one Identify - what has to be done? Identify task demands 2 Motivation & learning Motivation & learning Lecture behaviour Apply Steps 1 & 2 of Notemaking approaches heuristic to series of lessons lecture review task Composite lecture & text Group work - roles & tasks notes Begin task Study question - use of 3 Information processing Information processing Share, compare & evaluate Use of memory strategies lecture notes Making links Use of diagrams for notes Use of diagrams & visual Link to memory images Use of lecturer's structure Step 3 Monitor learning Identify purpose of notes 4 Verbal information Questioning & discussion Use of lecturer's structure Monitor & check own notes as a guide for lecture notes Note making model & & review practise Apply heuristic to tutorial Plan key questions for question (groups) series of lessons Identify & plan approach 5 Concept learning Prac briefing Tutorial presentation 1 Concept teaching exercise Prac as a learning experience, apply heuristic to prac 6 Evaluating learning Evaluation Tutorial 2 Self evaluation Monitoring and checking performance TEACHING PRACTICE 7 Problem solving Mid semester test Prac review Planning for the rest of the Personal learning semester Monitor learning Develop personal time line 8 Metacognition Metacognition Tutorial 3 Test feedback Personal metacognitive Use in monitoring strategies performance Planning & structuring essay responses 9 Operant conditioning Operant conditioning Making use of study Monitor assignment questions performance Heuristic: identify Implications for future plan, monitor tasks 10 Observational learning Observational learning Tutorial 4 Monitor study plan, revise Develop matrix of teaching Evaluate progress approaches 11 Cognitive & learning styles Cognitive & learning styles Creativity Creativity Tutorial 5 Consider personal learning Learning style exercise styles, activity 12 Catering for individual Catering for individual differences differences Exam preparation Exam performance techniques strategies Use of heuristic Use of heuristic 13 Unit review Unit review Develop concept map of Write summary from unit content concept map Discuss