Higher Education Pedagogy
Books
- How learning works : seven research-based principles for smart teaching / Susan A. Ambrose … [et al.] ; foreword by Richard E. Mayer. IN371.102 H8472 OISE
Interactive Engagement (IE) is achieved by questioning students or challenging them to think or to do something that requires thought. Students interact with each other, with the instructor as a coach or guide, or with guided materials created by the instructor (on paper or computer). A key ingredient is frequent and thoughtful interaction. Most of the quantitative research in science education regarding the effectiveness of IE in a learning environment comes from the physics community so these results are highlighted here. The references presented were carefully selected to be of generic interest to science teaching and hence are also quite relevant and useful as guidelines for teaching geoscience.
Hake (2002 (more info) and 1998) defines:
(a) “Interactive Engagement” (IE) methods as those designed at least in part to promote conceptual understanding through interactive engagement of students in heads-on (always) and hands-on (usually)activities which yield immediate feedback through discussion with peers and/or instructors….
(b) “Traditional” (T) courses as those reported by instructors to make little or no use of IE methods,relying primarily on passive-student lectures, recipe labs, and algorithmic-problem exams. Interactive Engagement [http://serc.carleton.edu/]
(from WP): Bass, R. 1999. “The scholarship of teaching: What is the problem?” Creative Thinking about Learning and Teaching 1(1). online Huber, M.T., and P. Hutchings. 2005. “Surveying the scholarship of teaching and learning”, Chap. 1, The Advancement of Learning: Building the Teaching Commons, (ISBN 0-7879-8115-X) Hutchings, P. 2000. “Approaching the scholarship of teaching and learning” (Introduction to Opening Lines: Approaches to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; ISBN 0-931050-68-5) online Kreber, C. 2002. “Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching” Innovative Higher Educ. 27:5-23. McKinney, K. 2004. “The scholarship of teaching and learning: Past lessons, current challenges, and future visions.” To Improve the Academy 22:3-19. Shulman, L.S. 1999. “Taking learning seriously” Change July/August 1999:11-17.
- Hatch, 2009Hatch, T. (2009). The scholarship of teaching and web‐based representations of teaching in the United States: definitions, histories, and new directions. Educational Action Research, 17(1), 63-78. doi:10.1080/09650790802667451
- Hutchings, 2000Hutchings, P. (2000). Introduction: Approaching the scholarship of teaching and learning.
- Cerbin & Kopp, 2006Cerbin, W., & Kopp, B. (2006). Lesson study as a model for building pedagogical knowledge and improving teaching. International journal of teaching and learning in higher education, 18(3), 250–257.
- Bass, 1999Bass, R. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: What’s the problem. Inventio: Creative thinking about learning and teaching, 1(1), 1–9.
- Shulman, 2002Shulman, L. S. (2002). Foreword. Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Eds. Mary Taylor Huber and Sherwyn P. Morreale. Washington: American Assn. of Higher Educ.
- Huber & Morreale, 2008Huber, M. T., & Morreale, S. P. (2008). Situating the scholarship of teaching and learning: A cross-disciplinary conversation.
- McKeachie & Svinicki, 2011McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. D. (2011). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
1. R. W.Guthrie and A. Carlin, “Waking the Dead: Using Interactive Technology to Engage Passive Listeners in the Classroom,” Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, August 2004.
2. A. Chickering and Z. Gamson, “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education,” AAHE Bulletin, No. 39, 1987, pp. 3–7.
3. C. Johnson, “Clickers in Your Classroom,” Wakonse-Arizona E-Newsletter, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2004, <http://clte.asu.edu/wakonse/ENewsletter/studentresponse_idea.htm> (retrieved January 24, 2007).
4. Ibid.
5. I. Beatty, “Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systems” (Boulder, Colo.: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Issue 3, 2004), p. 5, <http://www.educause.edu/LibraryDetailPage/666?ID=ERB0403>.
6. J. West, “Learning Outcomes Related to the Use of Personal Response Systems in Large Science Courses,” Academic Commons, December 9, 2005, <http://www.academiccommons.org/commons/review/west-polling-technology> (retrieved January 24, 2007).
7. Johnson, op. cit., para. 8.
8. L. J. Robertson, “Twelve Tips for Using a Computerized Interactive Audience Response System,” Medical Teacher, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2000, pp. 237–239; D. Duncan, Clickers in the Classroom (Upper Saddle, N.J.: Addison-Wesley, 2005); and Turning Technologies Audience Response Systems, Higher Education Best Practices, <http://www.turningtechnologies.com/highereducationinteractivelearning/bestpractices.cfm> (retrieved January 24, 2007).
9. Beatty, op. cit., pp. 6–7. Clickers in the Classroom: An Active Learning Approach (EDUCAUSE Quarterly) | EDUCAUSE.edu [http://www.educause.edu/]