This link is too long:
should be as: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2007.00407.x/abstract
without any Complexity; :-}
- library
Thanks Jon.
Your points make lots of sense to me. I like the idea of assessing memorization through application. Actually, I think competency-based learning is the way of future education, and a few universities are starting doing that or trying that (e.g. Western Governors University). This might be a good model for AU since AU's majority students are adults who have more immediate opportunities or needs of applying what they have learned. So, project-based, problem-solving, case study, research paper, product design, portfolio, presentation, discussion, ... all look good to me for this purpose.
One thing still bothers me. In some subjects, we need students to get a certain level of skills. For example, in math, we might want students to solve a problem in 5 mins, not a whole hour. So, if we evaluate how skillful a student is, timing should be an important factor (?). I am not sure what's the alternative of exam or quize to do it. Thoughts?
I strongly agree - WGU has an extremely sound basic model that clearly works, economically and pedagogically. We do have most of the pieces - challenge processes, independent study courses, PLAR, etc - and have been doing this in pockets for decades, but we should seriously consider building whole programs and perhaps even the whole university this way.
If (and only if) timing matters in an authentic setting, then by all means time it! It's absolutely fine as long as the conditions are realistic, the problems are genuine and situated, and the task and timing matches closely what competent individuals will actually need to do in the real world. There are lots of ways you could assess that, from lightweight reflections (just ask how long it took) to webcam-recorded evidence, to oral questions via a webinar and so on. But it would be necessary to think carefully about its authenticity and about what it actually shows. Speed only matters in an applied context so students should be doing this under real-world conditions or the nearest thing we can provide to that. And, if a problem should be solved in 5 minutes, then that's roughly how long the assessment should take. And unless, in real life, people have to solve a succession of such questions in 3 hours, we should not require it of them in an exam. Equally, if a problem should take days (many programming tasks are like that) then that's how long we should allow.
I recall an interview a long time ago where I was given a real-life programming task the company needed doing to complete in a few minutes using MS Access, a system I had not touched for years and had barely played with even then. I failed the task abysmally but I was offered the job anyway, because they were observing my problem-solving approach while I did it - which included chatting with them, looking stuff up online, making intelligent use of help files, etc - and that is what they were actually testing. I suspect that is the kind of thing we would want to assess in a mathematician rather than the results on an exam paper.
As long as it is authentic to the task and/or helps people to learn (it is constructively aligned), I have no problems with any particular form of assessment. The trouble with sit-down written exams of the sort we habitually use is that, with very few exceptions, they are not authentic and they make a negative contribution to the learning process.
Jon, your recounting the history of ELF is very helpful. Thanks for providing it in such detail. It most certainly puts the NGDLE idea in context. If nolthing else, we are hoping that a renewal of attention, discussion, and perhaps even investment might urge the evolution of the digital environment onwards at a pace faster than it would otherwise. I'd bet that we certainly agree that such acceleration would benefit everyone.
Thanks for engaging in the discussion!
- Malcolm Brown
It's a pleasure, Malcom - I wish you every success in this and will certainly use it to support my own efforts to see such a model used at Athabasca. It's great to see it pushed at a level where people are almost forced to at least defend their position against it. I suspect that, as back then, a lot of the biggest resistance will come from the likes of Blackboard, Pearson, and others that are strongly invested in preventing the success of truly open standards (though they will pay lip service).
One thing I did not mention in my list of reasons is that most of the pilot products were not very good - at least, given that they had to overcome the incumbents, they were not good enough. Brian W. Arthur (in The Nature of Technology) notes that it took decades for jet airplanes to become better than propeller-driven aircraft after their introduction: engineers knew they could be better, but it was a long hard struggle against a better product before they were. Getting compelling exemplars out there, ideally that start by building on things like Moodle, Sakai, etc, that are palpably superior to the old guard, will matter a lot.
The Landing is a social site for Athabasca University staff, students and invited guests. It is a space where they can share, communicate and connect with anyone or everyone.
Unless you are logged in, you will only be able to see the fraction of posts on the site that have been made public. Right now you are not logged in.
If you have an Athabasca University login ID, use your standard username and password to access this site.
We welcome comments on public posts from members of the public. Please note, however, that all comments made on public posts must be moderated by their owners before they become visible on the site. The owner of the post (and no one else) has to do that.
If you want the full range of features and you have a login ID, log in using the links at the top of the page or at https://landing.athabascau.ca/login (logins are secure and encrypted)
Posts made here are the responsibility of their owners and may not reflect the views of Athabasca University.
We block sites that track your web browsing without your permission. If a link is greyed out, click once to enable sharing, once more to share.