Week 3

Week 3

While reading Tagg chapters 10-16, I was reminded of an article posted last week in the Wall Street Journal website. The link is below:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323301104578255992379228564.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

The article describes a new program by the University of Wisconsin that will grant degrees based solely on performance on assessment tasks (mainly online tests), regardless of what courses students have taken. So, students never have to enroll in a class, but can get degrees as long as they can pass the tests.

On the one hand, you can argue this kind of program focuses on outcomes and performance and is a welcome change to the focus on credit hours. UW claims that it decouples learning from assessment, and this could then change the class focus from assessment to learning. It also gives students more flexibility to progress through the program at their own pace. This seems to agree with some the ideas and suggestions in Tagg. 

But, at the same time, my instincts as a teacher shout “No!” and here’s why. First, there seems to be a lack of any effort to build communities of practice like the ones described in Tagg. For some students this may not be necessary because they are already working in professional communities and simply seeking to get higher credentials, but for others the lack of a community of practice could be a really disadvantage. Secondly, beyond the knowledge and skills typically tested on online tests, there does not seem to be any effort to address skills like the ability “to work in a collaborative team” (Tagg, p. 246). I find it funny that for some schools the need to address these kinds of skills is so important that they start a special program (i.e. Maryland’s Gemstone program described in Tagg, p. 246), but then others like the University of Wisconsin are starting new programs that seem to completely ignore them. Finally, I wonder to what extent students will be engaged in a ‘hot cognitive economy’ in this kind of program. Will they really attend classes and focus on learning? Or, will they still just be thinking, “Is this going to be on the test?”

I’m curious to know what others think about this program.

Week 2

 Thoughts on the Collins Article

Chris’ article and the Tagg Chapters helped clarify for me some of the questions I had about how a group grade was intended to help us become more learning oriented rather than grade oriented. If I understand the theory correctly, it basically says that by engaging in collaborative learning, students form a community and through this become more engaged in the learning experience and less focused on grades. 

But then I have to wonder, to what extent does this really re-orient us toward learning? We have all participated in group work and know that it does not necessarily result in a more engaging learning activity or greater sense of community, nor does it necessarily shift grade-oriented students toward being learning oriented. In fact, students will often split up group assignments so that they can each do their own parts individually rather than work together, and students often expect individual grades on group assignments. Even when group work or other collaborative learning experiences work well and students are engaged in a high level of cognitive activity and a strong sense of community and forget about the grades for a while, after the activities are over or the class session has finished for the day, they soon return to thinking about their individual grades in the class. 

So perhaps, the only way to go about this properly (short of reforming the whole program as suggested in Tagg) is to do what Chris proposed to us: Commit 100%, and not only assign group activities but a group grade for the whole class as well. In this way students are encouraged to collaborate in one way or another throughout the whole semester, not just for some activities and assignments. At the end of this semester, it will be interesting to see if this approach has worked and we feel that the collaborative learning environment created by the group grade has helped us to focus on learning and forget to be grade-oriented.

What do you think? Am I interpreting the theory correctly? Are there other points that I'm missing?

Week 1

Our first class in EDEA 662 and this week’s reading in Tagg have left me with two main questions. The first pertains to our decision whether or not to receive a group grade as opposed to individual grades, and the second relates to the applicability of Tagg’s argument for institutional transformation.

First, I'll discuss our decision to receive a group grade. When Chris gave us the option of receiving a group grade, I was initially very excited about the prospect. A group grade would force us to be inclusive and encourage us to work together and support each other more than we might usually. However, as the discussion turned to grades, I realized that a group grade would force me to be more concerned about grades than I usually am. I think this is an unusual perspective and may come from my being a non-traditional student. The last time I worried about grades was in 1996 when I finished my Master’s degree. After teaching for 10 years, I decided to come back to the US and pursue a PhD, so as to be able to develop needed skills and better address problems that I found frustrating in my work. I first enrolled in a program in Massachusetts where I received an AGC. The classes in that program were graded on a pass/fail basis precisely for the reason that they wanted you to focus on learning rather than grades. This was fine with me, and I found that it really helped me think about what I wanted to get out of the classes and where I wanted to focus my time. Also, the work load was such that it was impossible to do all things in all classes at 100%, and you learned to pick and choose what was important to you. When I came to UH a few years ago, I carried that attitude with me and although my coursework here required grades, I rarely paid attention to them. For the past year I have been enrolled in 699s, also graded on a credit/no credit basis.

When we started class on Monday, I thought that I would approach the class in the same way I have others, focusing on what most addressed my needs and interests and what would most help me make progress on my dissertation. However, about half way through our discussion on the group grade, I realized that if we chose the group grade, I would now be responsible for everyone else’s grade and with that responsibility, would have to take into account about how my choices and work affected the class grade - no longer could I just focus on what I thought was useful to me. I still voted for the group grade option because I think it is a great opportunity to see how this kind of class structure affects classroom dynamics. I also see that it is a great way to encourage students to work harder as they have a sense of responsibility to others. However, I’m still not sure how it is meant to make us more learning oriented rather than grade oriented. Perhaps creating the rubric will be the key to that aspect of the experiment. I will be interested to see how this plays out and how it affects our attitudes toward grades and learning.

Second, I found Tagg’s first nine chapters interesting and refreshing, however his discussion regarding the need for institutional transformation rather than small scale innovations and curriculum plugs has left me wondering to what extent I can realistically apply some of the ideas in this book. I work in ESL, and ESL programs are often “service programs,” they are usually marginalized and have a low status among programs on campus, and they must meet the (often unrealistic) demands of many masters as our students come from all departments. ESL faculty are rarely given a voice in institutional planning, so while I agree with the idea that we need institutional transformation rather than a patchwork of innovations, I’m not sure how someone like me will have the opportunity to affect this kind of change. I hope this will be addressed in the book and classroom discussions, and I welcome everyone else’s ideas on this.