Still having the same problems today re viewing the recording. I will be so glad when BB Collaborate roll out their mp4 recording output so a session can be downloaded and played locally.
Nick Noakes
Posts made by Nick Noakes
Nancy, thanks for the quick reply.
Is there a full report of the study (or a draft?) that I could access with the 7 models included and other elements of the research findings?
A couple of thoughts from just watching 15 mins in to the session recording (it keeps freezing for mins on end while it downloads. then plays for a few mins and freezes again ... so far 45 mins to get 15)
There is perhaps another model to be added, that of central-discipline (e.g. UBC in CA, large unis in the US and even in my own small research intensive uni in Hong Kong). I don't thnk it is the same as integrated as it comes from a very different rationale. Did this come up in your research?
I also don't see these as a cycle necessary. A systems thinking diagram labelling the tensions that make shifts between models or back and forth might help.
Apologies Joyce and Nick for the misattribution.
In the previous post, I wasn't making a distinction with describing outcomes about who describes them - learner or teacher. I think both are needed in these types of approaches, I would expect learners to discuss, describe, decide their own outcomes and evaluation criteria. Just that I think it is important that the people involved try to do this and that in doing so, they need to take into account the complexity and divergence in outcomes that would be expected from an EBL approach. The quote I gave before seemed to imply that outcomes could not be determined in advance but I think some can, especially when you think about procedural knowledge associated with enquiry, as well as cognitive, skill and affective outcomes, as Nick gives in the examples above.
In the previous post, I wasn't making a distinction with describing outcomes about who describes them - learner or teacher. I think both are needed in these types of approaches, I would expect learners to discuss, describe, decide their own outcomes and evaluation criteria. Just that I think it is important that the people involved try to do this and that in doing so, they need to take into account the complexity and divergence in outcomes that would be expected from an EBL approach. The quote I gave before seemed to imply that outcomes could not be determined in advance but I think some can, especially when you think about procedural knowledge associated with enquiry, as well as cognitive, skill and affective outcomes, as Nick gives in the examples above.
Joyce said "Known outcomes would defeat the whole idea of enquiry based learning wouldn't it?"
Not necessarily, no ... at least for me. We have cognitive, skill and affective outcomes (all three of which are embedded in single competencies and wicked problems) and for knowledge we have factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. So I think it would help to be a bit more specific about what kinds of outcomes we hope learners to achieve in EBL/IBL and for each of these to what extent and in what way, they might be given in advance.
If you are talking about the factual and conceptual knowledge outcomes of the enquiry then I'd say probably yes to not being known in advance. I say probably because if we can't build in/describe divergence for intended higher level cognitive outcomes, then we have a real problem with outcomes period ... but I think we can. Even though that is a challenge, it is one worth aiming for, isn't it?
Another Nick
(but in Hong Kong)
Not necessarily, no ... at least for me. We have cognitive, skill and affective outcomes (all three of which are embedded in single competencies and wicked problems) and for knowledge we have factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. So I think it would help to be a bit more specific about what kinds of outcomes we hope learners to achieve in EBL/IBL and for each of these to what extent and in what way, they might be given in advance.
If you are talking about the factual and conceptual knowledge outcomes of the enquiry then I'd say probably yes to not being known in advance. I say probably because if we can't build in/describe divergence for intended higher level cognitive outcomes, then we have a real problem with outcomes period ... but I think we can. Even though that is a challenge, it is one worth aiming for, isn't it?
Another Nick
(but in Hong Kong)