Similar but twisted analogy here in entrepreneurial #learning , Just asking the customer what they think may not contribute to real intelligence if the product is new and innovative. To Quote Henry Ford If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses. https://t.co/RpHlqmoR9W
If you're going to 'just ask the kids' for student-led instruction/practice, please make sure there's evidence of effectiveness. If a student says they learn best by rereading their notes…they're wrong. Just going with what the student says isn't always correct.#leadupchat
I think this is where conferencing comes in. Using guided questions to help Ss see if they’re learning or not, if their strategies are effective or not. We have to teach Ss to self-assess if we want them to be life-long learners. #leadupchat
I had my Sophomores read a science-based article about how rereading doesn’t work, and half of them disagreed with it. Half ody class are science-deniers.
All About Motivation: Autonomy, responsibility, and other insights into what drives students to want to work hard and to like ithttps://t.co/IuSo0mVe1b
Does offering students a choice in assignments lead to greater engagement?
How do we allow for inquiry while still ensuring learning (the proficiency of standards)?
What are the most effective practices for facilitating diverse youth leadership in schools?
Do digital learning materials improve student achievement or motivation?
Following are some videos which i bookmarked and like to share about the first question in this article about CHOICE. ie Does offering students a choice in assignments lead to greater engagement ?
Students who know what success looks like have a goal and know how to achieve it.
But using learning objectives as a way to create goals of learning in each cases are not effective. Its because,”Objectives rely on concrete descriptors – slippery words like ‘persuasive’ and ‘methodical’. But knowing that an argument should be ‘persuasive’ does not show students how to make it persuasive: persuasiveness is the kind of idea “which cannot be specified in detail” and so “cannot be transmitted by prescription, since no prescription for it exists (Polanyi, 1962, p.53).
Show Me, Don’t Tell: Instead use concrete examples to demonstrate how success or end result looks like. Thus using an arsenal of exemplars instead of learning objectives. A sense of what success looks like “can be passed on only by example from master to apprentice (Polanyi, 1962, p.53.).” Examples “set the standards for what I and my students aspire to achieve (2003, p.29-30).” He offers students “a taste of excellence (p.31)”:
An ‘arsenal of exemplars’ lets us to show what success looks like, rather than tell. Cognitive science suggests that providing worked examples – models broken into steps – can help students learn better and more efficiently (Zhu and Simon, 1987).
Behavioral Econ and Learning: Learning leaders can use prospect theory to engage employees around learning and development by highlighting the potential pain of standing pat in their current situation rather than selling them on the potential benefits.https://t.co/u22B90KPZL
While the above article focus on application of Behavioral economics in workplace there are also interesting developments in the field of academic learning and policy.
Behavioral economics principles are becoming a powerful design stack for creating human-centered education practice and policy.
It can be used in a variety of educational decision-making contexts like:
Student engagement.
Instructional Design.
Physical Activities.
Math and Science Learning.
Optimizing student learning and collaboration.
The architecture of school cafeterias encourages children to select healthier eating options.
This idea seems to me as a very good reason why we need to design learning environment which encourages trying failing and correcting mistakes without any punishment associated with it.(Eg, Low–stakes testing).
This is the idea behind low stake testing. It involves the frequent use of evaluation instruments that have little impact on a student’s course grade.
There are no down side to failing in same environments.
Hyper-correction of high-confidence errors in the classroom : Does this means people with natural propensity to be more confident and outgoing has advantage in learning.https://t.co/1DEK9EMob6pic.twitter.com/YkH47eL6C9
According to Stanford Behavioral Scientist BJ Fogg, Design Crushes Willpower has 2 meanings.
1st (the good one) is that design wins. If U can design your life & behaviors well, U don’t need to rely on willpower.
2nd is dark: Others design things that overwhelm your willpower. (You take back control via design).
Fogg in his tiny habit design model points out that, doing something you don’t enjoy and failing to make it habitual is actually more detrimental to a mission for change than doing nothing at all.
According to him to create a lifelong habit, the focus should be on training your brain to succeed at small adjustments, then gaining confidence from that success.
To do that, one needs to design behavior changes that are both easy to do and can be positioned into the existing routine.
(more powerful if it’s biological routine).
BJ Fogg design method is comprised of three key steps.
1) Identifying your specific desired outcome: Eg Lose 10% of your body weight?
2) Identify the easy-win behaviors “tiny habits” that will put you on the path to that goal.
Finally,
3) Find a trigger, something that you already do as a habit and graft the new habit onto it.
That might mean putting out a salad on the counter every time you start the coffeemaker in the morning,
Or sleep in Gym cloths.
Tiny Habits works by design. Its made to avoid the trap of willpower-based decisions which are huge psychological toll if failed.
Motivational levels come and go with the wind, but flossing a single tooth is achievable no matter the emotional weather.
Fogg’s design perspective of habit change can be further expanded( or supplemented) by using another powerful model i recently came across, ie “Six Sources of Influence model by Al Switzler ( TED Video )”.
In this perspective Al Switzler added new levels of analysis by bringing the macro Social and Structural elements in the design to habits and behaviors.
He argues against the sole dependence on willpower as a reliable source of behavioral change or creating powerful persistent habits.
According to him there are Six Sources of Influence.( watch ted video for explanation)
Source 1 – Personal Motivation – whether you want to do it. Source 2 – Personal Ability – whether you can do it. Source 3 – Social Motivation – whether other people encourage the right behaviors. Source 4 – Social Ability – whether other people provide help, information or resources. Source 5 – Structural Motivation – whether the environment encourages the right behaviors. Source 6 – Structural Ability – whether the environment supports the right behaviors.
Each of which are complimented by other power sources.