But why specifications grading? What's wrong with points?

I use Specifications Grading for the courses I teach. This grading approach does not assign any points to assessable items. That is, there are no points to add up at the end of the semester to determine the final course grade. Each assessable item is either determined to have met the specifications I provided for it (in which case the item is marked “complete”), or that is did not meet the specifications (in which case the item is marked “incomplete”). The assessable items are grouped into a variety of categories (depending on the course). To earn a particular final course grade, a learner must “complete” a specified number of items in each assessable category, with lower grades typically requiring fewer “complete” items in each category.

But why!?

I sometimes get asked why I use specifications grading. This is usually followed with the question, “What’s wrong with points? That’s what we’ve been using since I was in school, and what today’s students are familiar with.” Let's explore these questions a bit.

Bucket of points

With a traditional point-based grading system, there is no way to _guarantee_ that a course’s student learning outcomes (SLO) are met, unless the _only_ thing that is _ever_ assessed are the SLOs. And even in that scenario, there is no (practical) way to know if they met _all_ of the SLOs (and if not, which ones did they meet?), unless they earn 100% of the possible points for the semester. Because all points go into the same “point bucket” to determine the final course grade, they get mixed together and “averaged,” and the ability to identify what the learner has shown evidence of learning is lost. Areas the learner does well in (earning lots of points) help mask area they may not have learned at all, due to the “extra” points from the good areas filling in the voids. As such, it is possible that we have learners completing a course with a grade of C having fully met very few (maybe none?) of the SLOs. Further, if they earned a B or C (or maybe even an A), we have no way of knowing which/how many of the SLOs were met.

Just throw them in the bucket...

Consider the following table showing scores for three learners. Do you consider all three of these learners B students? They all ended the semester with 82.5% of the possible points.

As I look at this data, I see three very different learners. On the one hand, Benny has pretty consistent scores on everything, in each case earning 80-83% of the possible points. Hoton, on the other hand, starts out very well, but then misses a couple of quizzes, and earns marginal scores on Exam 1 and the Final Exam. On the third hand, Dee doesn't do very well on the first few quizzes and Exam 1, but then does very well towards the end of the semester. 

I suspect we can agree that Benny is a B student. We may not be able to agree if Hoton and Dee are, however. If we just look at the Final Exam score, it's not clear that Hoton has learned course material at a B level, since they only earned 71% of the possible points. Did they not learn the material, or did they juust have a bad test day? However, again looking at the Final Exam score, Dee did better than Benny, earning 90% compared to Benny's 82%. Could that mean Dee simply needed more time to master the content, and maybe her Final Exam score indicates she should be considered an A student? Following similar logic, Is Hoton a C student? Or, do we declare all of them B students because they all earned 825 points? Because all of the points are dumped into the same bucket, we have an "average" of  the semester, and loose the details that might be beneficial in making decisions.

Let's fly across the country...

Before I describe this scenario to you, let me assure you that I do know this is not how airplanes are designed. But please hear me out, and just consider it an example, however contrived it may be.

Let's imagine there is a school you can attend where you take four courses and are considered to be fully qualified to design an entire airplane, with no minimum grade needed to pass a course. Further, let's imagine two particular engineers have taken these four courses, and both graduated from the program with identical 3.0 GPAs. Upon graduation, each engineer designed an airplane, and airplanes have been built to the engineer's specs. Does it matter to you which airplane you get on to fly across the county? Based on each engineer's GPA--the only thing you can base our decision on--your answer is likely that it does not matter.

But, what if I told you that Engineer 1 earned course grades of A, A, A, and an F, and Engineer 2 earned all Bs? Does that added information sway you one way or the other? Many people choose the airplane that Engineer 2 designed, even though they did not earn any As, because Engineer 1 earned an F. But, now what if you knew what the four courses were? Could that make a difference in our decision? If Engineer 1's F was in wing design, engine design, or cockpit design, you'd likely for sure choose choose the Engineer 2's plane. But if Engineer 1's F was a class about seat and interior design, you might opt for their plane, since you'd know that the engine, wings, and cockpit should be based on A-level work. You just might have an uncomfortable seat. Being able to know those details is important. Just having the average grade (the GPA) of the four courses hides the needed information you need to make the best decision.

Binned countable items

Specifications grading can provide a solution to the “problems” I just described. If the final course grade specifications are structured to do so, a particular final course grade can tell you exactly what/how many SLOs were met by a learner. For example, let’s assume a course has 5 SLOs. The specs could be configured such that a final course grade of C means they met at least 2 of the 5 SLOs. A grade of B means at least 4 of the 5, and an A means they met all 5. If structured even more carefully, the specs could even be configured such that a Grade of C would indicate exactly which 2 SLOs were met. I see this as a benefit! It allows a final course grade to mean something specific. Using the example I presented above, if a learner earns a B we can know they showed proficiency in at least 4 of the 5 SLOs, and maybe even know what they did not show proficiency in. For a points-based-graded course, all we can say is they earned at least 800 out of a 1000 points, but have little idea of what they actually learned. 

For me, points just don't add up!

Ever since I realized that a point-based grading system hides deficiencies as well as strengths in an average, I've been very uncomfortable using it. Fortunately, I discovered specifications grading's benefits many years ago, and have been using it ever since. There is no going back for me, because points just don't meet my specs.

Reflecting on roadblocks

How do you overcome roadblocks?

During the middle of the courses I teach, I have an assignment wherein I ask the learners (via a few prompts) to reflect on how they are doing in the course, and to consider what they need to do to accomplish their goals for the course by the end of the semester. 

The last prompt I provide in this assignment asks the learner if they have any questions for me. Seldom do I receive any serious questions as a result of that prompt. When I do, they are usually fairly simple and straightforward to answer. 

However, occasionally I receive a question that causes me to reflect a bit before I am able to respond with (what I hope will be) a helpful answer. I received one of those questions last fall, and decided to provide it and my response here for others to reflect on it as well, in the hopes that someone else may find it helpful. What follows is a transcription of the email I sent to the learner, along with their response.

My email response

I really appreciate the thoughtful reflections you shared in your Mid-semester self-assessment report. At the end of it, you wrote:

 My only question is if there was at any point in your career where you felt like you've hit a roadblock in CS; and if so, how did you overcome it? After my first year as a CS student in college, I felt like I hit a roadblock after feeling so behind compared to everyone else and I struggled to overcome this. I understand CS is an ever changing field with platforms and new advancements always being added so it is important to always hone your skills while remaining proactive and positive. Regarding this, I know at some point again in my CS career as a student finishing my last two years in undergrad with a plan to attend grad school, I know I will eventually hit another roadblock to overcome some obstacle. I was wondering if you have any advice about overcoming these “roadblocks,” if you've hit one during or had a similar challenge throughout your CS career thus far?

To which I’ll respond with a resounding YES! I’ve hit roadblocks and experienced imposter phenomenon many times. 

 

Thinking back to when I was an undergrad learning CS is a few too many decades for me to precisely remember my experiences, but I’m sure I had roadblocks and doubted myself then. After graduating, I landed a job as a programmer for a company here in Muncie. I was with that company for nearly 30 years—until they didn't need me anymore. I’ve written about that experience in a blog post that you may enjoy reading. Here’s another blog post that tracks my journey from HS to now, as well. (I’ll not continue to link to other blog posts, but if you have time and interest, there may be others you’ll find interesting to read.)

 

For the last 17 years, I’ve either been in grad school (2.5 years) or teaching here at BSU. I certainly questioned myself as a 50 year old going back to college as a grad student. How was a 50-something going to keep up and be accepted by the other 20-something learners? But I persisted, and discovered it was very doable, and people were very welcoming. I’m now in my 15th year teaching full time at Ball State University. Especially during the first decade of teaching—but still now—I experienced doubts about being “qualified” to teach. Do I know enough? Am I providing the best learning environment for the learners? Am I being understanding of their needs and challenges?

 

These questions all led me to focus my research on education and learning, more so than on CS research. But even with better understanding of ways of teaching and learning, I continue to explore what I might be able to do to be a better teacher. Those thoughts of “am I enough” and “am I delivering enough” always haunt me.

 

I think, to a large extent, people who doubt themselves are the ones who take time to reflect on their lives and what they are accomplishing. People who have no doubts about themselves likely are not doing much (any?) reflection. I’ve found that growth mostly comes to those who are seeking growth—those who reflect on their current experience and consider how they’d like it to change.

 

So, I see the fact that you are doubting yourself as a good thing—you’re wanting to grow! Keep doing that.

 

I’ll be glad to talk more, if you’re ever interested in doing so. I also want to thank you for posing your questions. It’s forced me to take a step back and reflect a bit.

The learner's response

(Included with the learner's permission.)

Thank you for your detailed response to my question. I appreciate you including your blog postings, I really enjoyed reading them.

After reading your blog from 2017, I was inspired how you overcame your unfortunate dismal from the company you were working at from 1979–2007. I am glad that the “last pieces fell into place” for you, and you were able to continue your journey in CS as an official graduate student at BSU. I understand why it must’ve been difficult learning new languages after working in the industry for nearly thirty years and how you felt conflicted to teach your students since the weight of not knowing if you were “qualified” enough was haunting you at the time. After reading this, I realized this was your version of hitting a “roadblock” along with experiencing a case of the imposter phenomenon. 

Your experience is similar to how I feel at times; unsure about my skills and not fully knowing if I’ll be able to achieve a certain project. Despite your “roadblock” and uncertainty, you continued forward on your journey and achieved many things thus far, such as: presenting papers, publishing in journals and books, along with helping all of your students, myself included, at BSU since 2010. From your second blog from 2022, it was interesting reading about your journey from high school to Manchester University, to graduate school, and to eventually your current position–a senior professor at BSU.

Reflecting on my initial “roadblock” question after reading about your experiences, I know now that there is no easy road to take when confronted with an obstacle–there is no clear left/right path. There is, however, an upward path to overcome that brick wall and simply climb over it. Of course, this is easier said than done, but after reading about your journey it is possible with discipline, perseverance, and determination. The next time I hit a “roadblock,” I will reach towards that upward path and climb over the brick wall to search for the silver lining–just as you have.

I want to thank you for your encouraging words; I do want to grow, and I will continue to have this mindset that doubting myself will allow me to prosper as an individual and a CS student by reflecting on my past experiences and accomplishments.

Your reflection and response

Now it's your turn to reflect.

• What would have been your response to the learner's question?
• What insights or advice would you have offered different from what I provided?
• How have you navigated roadblocks in your life? 
• Have they taken you in directions you did not expect?

I look forward to receiving your responses in the comments.

Image credits: https://stock.adobe.com/

Assessing Assessment

For the last two years, I’ve served my college as one of three “Pedagogy Fellows.” Our role has been to be a pedagogy resource to the college’s faculty in a variety of different ways. One of those ways has been to write short messages that we emailed to them on an (almost) weekly basis. The following is a slightly edited version of the last post I was responsible for writing.

It’s the second week of April, with just a couple more weeks of instruction left this semester. The spring semester is nearly over, and course grades will soon be posted. Once they’re submitted our thoughts will turn to preparing for fall courses. OK, we’ll likely take a few days or weeks off to catch our breath, but sometime in the next few months we’ll start that preparation. Some of us like to address it early in the summer and then devote the remainder of the summer to other activities, and some of us flip that around and prepare at the end of the summer.

What are you assessing?

As you start your fall course planning, I encourage you to consider what you’re assessing. Are you assessing (all) the course learning objectives? Are you (sometimes) assessing learner behaviors (such as meeting due dates) rather than course learning objectives? Is it important that those behaviors are assessed, or is that occurring because that’s the way we’ve always done it? Take time to identify what knowledge and skills you want your learners to leave your course with. How well does your list match up with the course learning objectives? If there is a significant difference between the two lists, is that OK, or should they be reconciled, perhaps removing some from one list, and adding some to the other?

How are you assessing?

Besides considering what you are assessing, reflect on how you are assessing? Do your assessments measure learning and understanding, or just the learner’s ability to memorize content for a few hours or days? Is the course grade calculation structured in such a way that a learner can do poorly in one part of the course, but make up those points in another part of the course, thus producing an average grade? Is it OK that the course grade may “hide” the fact that they did poorly in part of the course? Is it possible for a learner to do so poorly on an exam during the start of the semester that there is no way their course grade can recover, regardless of how well they’ve learned the course content by the end of the semester? Does it matter if a particular learner has not gained understanding by a particular date early in the semester, or just that they have the understanding by the end of the semester?

As you are pondering all of this, I encourage you to check out low-stakes and authentic assessment. Also, review material on the mastery learning model and backwards design. And lastly, consider moving away from a points-based system to other alternative grading systems, such as collaborative grading, and specifications grading. Both approaches help center and encourage the learning that you want to occur, rather than having the learners focus on “what do I have to do to earn points to get a B.” Lastly, review this list of blogs and podcasts to see what you can glean from them.

Blogs

• Faculty Focus: Higher Ed teaching strategies from Magna Publications.
• Grading for Growth: Innovative grading methods that work with rather than against student learning: specifications grading, standards-based grading, ungrading, and more.
• BSU Teaching Innovation Blog: A virtual hub for dialogue and community: learn about and share research-informed, learner-centered pedagogy, from teaching with technology to experimental and active learning strategies.
• Paul Gestwicki's Blog: A blog for reflective practice focused on Computer Science, but applicable to all.

Podcasts

• Tea for Teaching: Informal discussions of innovative and effective practices in teaching and learning.
• Teaching in Higher Ed: Faculty development for professors.
• Think UDL Podcast: Discussions with people who are designing and implementing strategies in post-secondary settings with learner variability in mind.

Time to act!

Since you’ve got to this point in my ramblings, I must have held your interest. What caught your eye? What has caused you to consider doing something different? Do you have other suggestions of assessment-related things we should consider as we prepare our courses? Now’s the time to act. It’s time to assess your assessment.

Image credit: https://stock.adobe.com/

What do you see when you compare these two ID cards?

I received my first non-student ID card from Ball State University (the top ID shown to the left) when I started teaching full time in August 2010. The card served me well for nearly a decade and a half. I had to replace it a few days ago (the bottom ID shown to the left), due to BSU upgrading the card readers for some of the rooms in the building in which I regularly teach. The technology changed, and my original card no longer granted me access to the rooms. Since I was allowed to keep my original card, it provides me the opportunity to compare the two.

What do you see when you look at these two ID cards? There’s an obvious difference in card design. When comparing my two photos, I see that my hair has turned silver (that sounds more sophisticated than gray) and is considerably longer. My eyeglasses have changed as well. I was dressed a bit more formally when the new card's photo was taken than I was for the original. On the surface, that’s about it.

But there are other differences hiding below the surface! What’s not obvious from simply comparing the two cards is how I’ve changed in other ways. When I look at the new card, I see a teacher and mentor who has transitioned from…

• Being a “sage on the stage,” to being a “guide on the side.”
• Using lecturing exclusively, to using flipped classroom and active learning pedagogies, as well as discussion-based pedagogies.
• Using a “pile of points” grading system where everything was worth points, to using Specifications Grading where there are no points.
• Being very teacher-centered, to being very learner-centered.
• Being very strict with course policies, to understanding that “life happens” and providing grace is a much better thing to do.
• Imposing penalties for late assignments, to having no penalty imposed for late work because life gets in the way, and people learn at different speeds.
• Giving learners one chance to get their assignment correct, to allowing them to rework and resubmit their work until they have it correct, demonstrating their learning.
• Thinking that grades are meaningful, to realizing they are arbitrary and get in the way of learning because learners focus on earning the points rather than learning.
• An anxious, "can I really do this!?" Instructor, to a confident Senior Lecturer.
• Someone who sought advice from others, to someone whose advice is sought. (Although, he still seeks advice from others on a regular basis!) 

I also see someone who…

• Created and taught five new courses, some multiple times.
• Created and led a three-week field study for learners who traveled in England, Scotland, and Ireland.
• Continuously seeks ways to improve diversity, inclusion, and equity in Computer Science and elsewhere.
• Published more than 70 book chapters, journal articles, conference proceedings, trade magazine articles, and white papers, and presented well over 60 times at international, national, and regional conferences.
• Serves as the coordinator of the CS 120 All-section Art Show every semester, an event he created twelve years ago to promote the department and recognize learner accomplishment.
• Serves as a mentor to new faculty.
• Mentored twelve Immersive Learning courses which had a positive impact on the community.
• Serves on multiple college and university committees.
• Delivered the address at a summer BSU commencement.
• Was recognized with multiple awards.

Reflecting on all of this, apparently more than just the color and length of my hair has changed. Very little of it seemed like a big change at the time, however. Much of it has been a gradual change over time. How have you changed in the last 15 years? What items would be on your list?

Creativity as expressed in HONR 176 final projects (summer/fall 2023 & spring 2024 edition)

I previously wrote about the creative ways learners in my spring 2020, fall 2020, spring and fall 2021, spring 2022, and summer/fall 2022 and spring 2023 Honors College courses (HONR 296. now HONR 176) exhibited and documented their knowledge and understanding of the course's material. The course title is "Computer Science and Algorithms to Live By." The course final project, in summary, was to create a tangible artifact that recorded their responses to the course’s essential questions, as it related to their chosen major(s) and/or minor(s). In this post, I am showcasing the creativity of nineteen summer 2023, fall 2023, and spring 2024 learners who were willing for me to share their work.

I encourage you to read to the end of this post and click on all the thumbnail images and links to experience the full breadth of how these students understood computer science and algorithms to impact their current and future lives. In the interest of brevity, I have not provided any commentary about them, but rather have provided a brief description and an image or link for you to investigate further. They are listed in random order.

---

Evan Davis, being an architecture major, created a physical model to connect the ideas of this course to what he learned throughout his first-year studio. This is an example of a study model, which is a 3-D model made using simple materials to help visualize a more complicated idea. Through turning the antenna coming out the top of the computer, the words on the screen shift, revealing answers to all the course's essential questions.

Mang Lian created a slide show that connected architecture to algorithms. It helped him understand what a computer is and how you can see it through architecture as well.

Margaret Manning created a slide show that presented an algorithm of swallowing, and explained how algorithms and computers are related to the job of a speech-language pathologist.

Jenna Mathes created an algorithm that describes the steps needed to diagnose and treat an articulation disorder in a child. This is an extremely long process, but by breaking it down into a multi-step algorithm, she hopes to have simplified it, making it more digestible.

Clara Daugherty created a drawing that was meant to tie in many aspects talked about in class. As a hospitality major, she found it a little difficult but if you sit and look at it long enough, all questions of the course essential questions will be answered.

Abigail Denault, being a journalism major, responded to the course's essential questions in the format of a 12-page booklet, complete with a table of contents and cover.

Amelia Dorsey recorded a video answering questions about how algorithms are related to our lives.

Eli Germain created an infographic that describes ways in which algorithmic thinking can be applied to the strategies of modern board games. It describes four strategies based on algorithms and applies their structures to two popular board games--Catan and Ticket to Ride.

Sarah Olsen wrote a magazine article. In it she stated "Though simple in theory, algorithms and the computers that use them are often far from basic, and while many algorithms are observable in nature, many more are manufactured by humans in order to solve a specific problem."

Megan Pax created a set of art activity and project lesson plans designed for the middle school level that are based on the course's essential question. All components of lesson plans are included, such as objectives, standards, sequences, materials, references, and assessments.

Keegan Fontaine created a brief podcast in which three students discuss the course's essential questions, and how their lives relate to them.

Afton Vanek researched how algorithms will impact the future of art museums, especially with the popularity of artificial intelligence in the 21st century, and presented her responses in the format of an infographic.

Maurianna Manuel created a presentation that compared the widespread use of computer technology to the growing field of nursing and how the two work harmoniously together.

Mar Nester created this video as a crash-course about all of the topics we covered in this course.

Grace Provenzano explored the application of algorithms, math, and technology in an abstract and artistic manner in this video. Using the natural world as inspiration, it analyzes the impact increasing technological advances have made on our daily lives and environment.

Lindsey Thole applied an algorithmic approach to architectural design consisting of a repeating process of extrusion and subdivision.

Brooke Williams drew this picture of a brain, stating that a "brain is a computer that all of us have inside of us."

Lucas Moody  created a remake of a song  called "Can’t Stop Partying" by Weezer ft. Lil Wayne. It wraps up everything that he learned in the course through the lyrics.

Feona Dabson found it amazing and relaxing to make a song. In the lyrics, she highlights the way algorithms occur outside of the electronic world. The need to be efficient, limitations of memory, benefits of relaxation, strategic efforts, emotional side to our actions, all that jazz. She took this class and put it into a funky tune, stating that "her lyric video is very rudimentary and made to foster laughter."

---

So, there you have it. nineteen different responses to the same prompt. Leaving an assignment open (as opposed to strictly defined) provides the learner an opportunity to explore their passions, and thus they are likely to engage with the assignment more fully. It also makes the evaluation of the assignment a lot more interesting, since the submissions are not cookie cutters of each other, and I often learn something new as well. Learner-centered teaching for the win.

What interesting assignments have you had? Describe it in a comment below.

Image credits: All images and other media were provided by their creators.

My reflections after participating in a Disability & Accessibility Faculty Learning Community during 2023-2024

I’ve been doing my best to be reasonably knowledgeable and aware of all things related to disability and accessibility—especially as it relates to teaching and learning—for well over a decade. I’ve availed myself of many workshops and training events offered by Ball State University (my employer) over the years and have served as a Disability Services Faculty Mentor for the last few years. As such, when a message arrived in my email inbox that a Disability & Accessibility Faculty Learning Community (FLC) was going to be held during academic year 2023-2024, my initial reaction was one of discounting it, thinking I likely was already familiar with what would be discussed.

However, after a bit of reflection, I decided to participate in the FLC based on the premise that there is always something to be learned. I also realized there were likely concepts and ideas that I’d once learned, not used, and subsequently forgotten. Having a “refresher course” didn’t seem like a bad thing to do. I also figured hanging around a bunch of like-minded folks could be interesting. And so, I signed up.

It turns out I was right about learning new things. The very first week the FLC met, I was confronted with the fact that there were protests half a century ago in support of making all things accessible to all people of which I was totally unaware. It turns out my knowledge of the “disability movement” was totally lacking. These protests and sit-ins eventually led to the signing of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

During week two, we explored the disability laws, specifically as they apply to higher education, and week three we explored student and parent expectations about disability services in higher education, and how they might be different than they were used to in high school. This was a good review for me, with a few new insights along the way.

Later weeks found us exploring a myriad of other topics, including implementing accommodations, things that can go wrong, how to make course content accessible, and physical aids and resources that are used by students, among many other topics. Again, I knew (or had known) about most all of this, but it was good to be reminded. Our visit to the Accessible Technology Lab was particularly interesting. To see and hear about the actual technology was impactful. 

So, am I leaving the FLC with any significant new knowledge, understanding, or a change of mind or attitude? No, not really. Very little of the content presented during the FLC was new to me. However, it was very good to hear it again and be reminded of what I need to, and can do for learners. Perhaps I'm leaving with a renewed desire to do all I can to help everyone.

One last observation I’ll make is that it is good to have a second person from the CS department who also participated in the FLC. Not to suggest that other faculty in the department aren’t interested in the services/accommodations we could/should provide to our learners, but it is not necessarily a priority for them—at least not enough of one for them to attend training events. To have another department faculty member participate with me means I’m not alone; there are (at least) two of us who are interested enough to put in a bit of extra effort. Perhaps the two of us can start a mini revolution within the department. Stay tuned!

P.S.  Since you’ve read to the end, here’s a little treat. For a (slightly irreverent, but largely accurate) video about the “disability movement,” watch this short Comedy Central Drunk History video about how Judy Heumann fought for people with disabilities. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed, and if you are, I'm sorry I suggested it.

Image credits:

Downloaded from the BSU Office of Disability Services Facebook page,

Providing ingredients for learner success

In preparation for a Community of Practice meeting about active learning, our facilitator asked us to read Dr. Dunja Trunk's Faculty Focus post entitled "A Recipe for Student Success." In it, they describe five ingredients needed for learner success, and provide details and examples for each of the five. (I encourage you to take a few brief minutes to read their worthwhile post, if you've not already done so.) The five ingredients are the following.

1. Clear goals and objectives
2. Develop effective study habits
3. Establish effective communication channels
4. Take care of physical and mental well-being
5. Embrace continuous learning and growth mindset

This got me thinking

I fully support this list and have nothing to add to it, other than an an obvious addition—acquire domain knowledge and understanding. The post did get me thinking, however. To what extent are we teachers/mentors responsible for enabling a learner to utilize these ingredients? Our response to this question likely determines how we teach. In particular, should we...

1. Assume the learners know about the ingredients and how to use them?
2. Tell the learners about the ingredients and how to use them?
3. Give the ingredients to the learners?
4. Show the learners how to use the ingredients?
5. Have the learners use the ingredients?

I'll be developing my response to my questions for the rest of this post. I invite you along for the journey, and will be curious to see if you follow me, or take a different path.

Preparing a meal

If we use an analogy of preparing a meal, it seems to me that an individual is not likely to be (consistently) successful simply by reading and following a recipe, unless they have a lot of past experience doing so. So if our learners have little experience or knowledge, we best avoid assuming they know what's needed for the meal. Further, we can't simply tell them the ingredients they need, as they may not know where to acquire the needed ingredients. Also, telling someone how to put icing on a cake is not likely to lead to success for them  the first time. It takes practice; sometimes lots of practice.

So, perhaps we need to be giving our learners the ingredients, and showing how to use them. How much garlic is enough, but not too much? Does the water need to be cold or warm when we add it to the other ingredients? What part of the meal should we start preparing first, if we want everything ready at (roughly) the same time? Preparing a meal is not easy. Getting it right the first time is quite a challenge. Learning is not easy either, nor is getting it right the first time.

But, simply giving our learners the ingredients and showing them what to do with them still doesn't seem like enough. We need them to actually try (and likely fail) to make the meal themselves. It is in the doing (and failing) that learning happens. The more we do, the more practice we have, the better we get.

But, what about chefs?

But, what if we have a learner who is very experienced, and has a broad understanding of the material? I think I still arrive at the same point as I did before. However, I won't be explaining and demonstrating near as much, and certainly would not expect to be discussing or showing foundational ideas and skills. If I'm working with a "chef" to prepare a meal, it is going to be more of a collaboration—the two of us will be sharing ideas and questioning each other. But there will still likely be some advanced knowledge or skills that they do not yet have, and need to observe and practice. And yes, I'll likely learn something from them as well during that collaboration.

My teaching

How does all this impact how I teach and mentor? I've posted about how I teach a few times, here and here, for example. I strive to develop and repeatedly present clear course goals and objectives to the learners. I provide opportunities for them to develop effective study habits. I do my best to have clear and consistent communication with the learners, and encourage them to do so, as well. I consider the individual learner when making decisions, and I am constantly promoting a growth mindset and reminding the learners that making mistakes is fine, as long as we learn from them.

My teaching heavily utilizes the following.

• Active learning
• Flipped learning
• In-class demonstrations and activities
• Small group discussions
• Class discussions
• In- and out-of-class group work
• Learner-centered focus
• Specifications grading, and sometimes ungrading
• Flexible due dates, based on circumstances
• Very little lecturing

I strive to provide a learning environment focused on the learner, not me. I strive to be aware of what the learners do and do not know, and meet them where they are. Sometimes I'm able to accomplish this in class, and sometimes it is accomplished in one-to-one sessions in my office or via Zoom. When teaching higher-level courses, I do expect the learners have more experience, but I try not to assume it. That is, I strive to verify what experience they are bringing to the course. 

I strive to always provide examples of, and opportunities for the learners to practice, the five ingredients needed for learner success that Dr. Dunja Trunk described in their post.

Your teaching?

How do my thoughts and approach to teaching/mentoring match up with yours? What can we learn from each other? Please share your thoughts and ideas so that I (and other readers) can benefit from them. I look forward to it, as I continue to learn how to treach.

Image credit: https://stock.adobe.com/