Redesigning Introductory Economics

1
Redesigning Introductory Economics

• Techno-collaborative Learning
• Maha Bali
• Aziza Ellozy
• Herb Thompson

2
The context

• Changing landscape in teaching and learning
• Teach less, learn more
• Learning technologies allow for innovations, can
  be powerful learning tools

LEARNING
3
Introduction

• Aim of project was to create a learner-centered,
  formatively assessed course that used web-enabled
  technology
• Introductory Microeconomics chosen to be
  redesigned
• Has many sections and has broad institutional
  impact

4
Research question

• Does computer-mediation, coupled with active
  learning pedagogy enhance student performance or
  student interest in the learning process?

5
Commenting on the experiment, Dr Thompson says

• The experiment, carried out in conjunction with
  the Center for Learning and Teaching, compared
  two classes taught concurrently. In one class I
  used the talking head approach with
  examinations. In the other class I used the
  active learning approach in which groups of
  students interactively used computer sites,
  created projects, did the lecturing and used me
  as a facilitator to help guide them through the
  morass of information.

6
Commenting on the experiment, Dr Thompsons says

• Had you walked into the first class you would
  have probably been as bored as the students. Had
  you walked into the second you would have
  probably been astonished by the chaos. Which
  group of students do you think did better?

7
Description and Methodology

• To gather comparative data
• Two parallel sections traditional and
  innovative were taught
• Same professor
• Same semester
• Same textbook
• Same final exam
• Same pre- and post- tests

8
Teaching/learning approaches in each section
Syllabus, topic notes, glossary, ppt. slides,
learning styles questionnaire, study guide,
chapter links to relevant internet material,
links to classical scholars in economics,
calendar, bonus questions, discussion forum and
quizzes. Student group projects and learning
journals were uploaded for viewing by the entire
class.
Lectures by students using .ppt slides. Student
centred, open class participation and
interaction encouraged (e.g., peer instruction,
group activities collaboration and sharing of
computer searches to solve problems or discuss
issues)
Lectures by instructor with .ppt slides. Students
were encouraged to ask questions before and
during lectures.
Lecture
Class projector and screen for use by all. Each
student supplied with a personal computer.
Software (Timbuctu) allowed any of the computers
to use projection screen.
One computer, projector and screen for professor
Class Environment
9
Teaching/learning approaches in each section
Group project Learning journal uploaded on WebCT
2 readings and summary analysis uploaded on
WebCT discussion forum
Assignments
10 online quizzes one per week. Following
quiz, peers discuss answers. Credit given simply
for taking quiz
2 paper-based pop quizzes, with normal
assessment of correct answers.
Quizzes
10 online quizzes 10 Class/Web participation
20 Class project 30 Learning Journal
15 Final Exam 25
2 pop quizzes 20 Class participation
20 Midterm 20 2 paper-based readings and
summary analysis 20 Final Exam 20
Direct Assessment
Pre- and Post-course tests, Student evaluations,
a Small Group Instructional Diagnosis, Learning
Styles questionnaire, WebCT tracking student
activities
Indirect Assessment
10
LLT Structure at AUC
11
Collaboration in Stages

• Instructional Design
• WebCT Design
• Implementation
• Formative Assessment
• Data analysis
• Final Assessment
• Of course, the instructor was involved
  throughout

12
CollaborationPlanning
13
Collaboration Assessment
14
Collaboration Assessment
15
Available Data

• Learning Styles Questionnaire
• Pre- and Post- test results
• Final Exam and final grades
• Student course evaluations
• Small Group Instructional Diagnosis

16
Learning Styles Questionnaire1

• Active vs. Reflective learners
• Sensory-based vs. Intuitive learners
• Visual vs. Verbal learners
• Sequential vs. Global learners
• Results more anecdotal than analytical.
• Provides room for consideration

1 Felder and Solomon available at
http//www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/
17
Pre- and Post-Course test results
18
Final Exam and Final Grades
19
Student evaluationsA. Course
Evaluation (Mean) of Course on a scale of 1-5
with 1 Strongly Disagree 5 Strongly Agree
20
Student evaluationsB. Instructor
Evaluation (Mean) of Instructor on a scale of 1-5
with 1 Strongly Disagree 5 Strongly Agree
21
Small Group Instructional Diagnosis summary

• Innovative section
• Students more comfortable with speed of the
  course, the use of technology, and the material
  covered.
• Traditional section
• Students uncomfortable with the speed of
  instruction felt their questions were not
  sufficiently answered and that the course was not
  sufficiently interactive.

22
Small Group Instructional Diagnosis summary

• Innovative section
• Students much more interested in taking more
  economics courses and/or majoring in economics
• Traditional section
• Students showed much less enthusiasm for the
  material covered, or for economics as a
  discipline

23
Conclusions

• Insufficient quantitative and qualitative data to
  allow clear, undifferentiated judgements.
• Activity-based alternative vs. talking head/
  conventional testing
• Sufficient evidence to show that the learning
  process (and economics) enjoyed much more by
  students when engaged in an open, active,
  collaborative manner.

24
Publication

• This work has been presented at WEBIST 2006
  International Conference on Web Information
  Systems and Technologies (in Portugal, April
  2006) and appears in the refereed conference
  proceedings

25

Questions ?
Thank You