Student-driven module: promoting independent learning

International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, Jul 2005 by Nortcliffe, Anne

Abstract

Programming courses can, by their nature, be very dry. One question this raises is: can a student-driven course provide an opportunity for a higher level of learning? This paper intends to present the results and analysis of such an innovative approach and the students' reactions to taking responsibility for a module in network programming.

Keywords curriculum development; peer assessment; student supplemental instruction

Programming courses are often dry in content and delivery, even when the subject matter is of intrinsic interest to the students, for example web programming. The consequence of this is that students become bored and their level of learning seriously impaired; therefore the traditional approach of 'chalk and talk' offers a limited learning experience.1 One might then ask whether this approach is appropriate for such subjects that are dry by nature. For instance, an 'uncovering' approach to planning a lecture course may be more appropriate, as this allows the students to 'uncover' the information for themselves, as opposed to the academic covering all the material.2 Such a method would discourage the students' perception, one also fostered by many academics despite heavy workloads, that the academic is the source of all knowledge.3 Therefore any innovation should not only provide light relief to those involved in course design and delivery, but also actively promote the learning goals of higher education.

In terms of learning, students should be encouraged to move through the four quadrants of Kolb's cycle. Kolb's learning cycle aims to provide concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation and active experimentation.4 Ideally, any new learning strategy should facilitate the opportunity for students to reflect upon their learning. However, even the most well-designed course provides little chance for students to review their progress in relation to course goals.5 It is accepted that much of these issues are due to time constraints and the sheer volume of students. Therefore, the new approach needs to be carefully implemented in order not to overburden the students or academic, particularly in terms of marking.6 The opening for reflection can be resolved using pre- and post-course tests, but this involves a high proportion of work for the academic and student which also can inhibit learning, and encourage strategic learning.5,1,7 However, some sort of assessment process is required as a primary factor in motivating student learning.8 Therefore some form of assessment needs to be adopted in the approach.

Allowing students to take responsibility for their learning and for course design and delivery has in the past fostered an 'uncovering' style of learning, high student motivation, and excellent attendance, even in the academic's absence.3 Some learning theorists have suggested that supplemental instruction - that is, teaching others a subject - helps to promote a higher level of learning.9 A student teaching model of instructing all the students in an engineering class to prepare material for each week's topic and selecting one student each week to present the material in theory resulted in the students achieving a greater depth of understanding of the subject.10 However, this model is unsuitable for today's large-volume degree courses, in terms of workload, timescales and marking, and for degree courses that are coursework intense, as over-assessment of students inhibits learning.5,1

However, on reducing the numbers of assessments, students were found to study less and more narrowly, received less feedback and less timely feedback to act upon.11 Therefore any new method incorporating assessment procedures should provide the means to motivate the students to study, assess the students without overburdening both parties (students and academic) and yield plenty of high-quality, timely feedback.

This paper presents an alternative student teaching model, the results of such an experiment and the reactions of students to designing/delivering a course in conjunction with peer assessment. The approach adopted and described within this paper illustrates how each lecture was developed and delivered by a group of students. Peer assessment was used as part of the overall method of assessment, partly because the academic cannot be there 24/7 and partly because the completed forms provide an insight into both the group's dynamics and the individual's contribution, effort and impact upon the group.13 It also provides an opportunity for the academic to take on a more supportive tutorial role in the assessment process.12 It is accepted that the peer assessment process is stressful and that not only do students question its appropriateness, but racial prejudice, personality clashes and personal loyalties may all distort the results.14,15 The author's experience confirms that this is true, but that with careful implementation and moderation these problems can be resolved.13 The increased number of assessors increases the reliability of the assessment, and any abnormality is watered down by the rational majority.16 The reality is that we all apply formative peer assessment every day, and if this is harnessed effectively it provides valuable peer feedback.14 For example, a 'feedback sandwich', in which a constructive critique is provided by one's peers, provides a framework upon which a person can build to improve their learning.17 In the case of using peer assessment as part of summative assessment there is a need to explain clearly the assessment criteria, to encourage the students to use a feedback sandwich and to clarify and justify their comments with marks, in order to prevent experiences of failed peer-assessment.15,18 This paper demonstrates how formative peer assessment can be effectively harnessed to provide informative feedback to the students presenting the lecture.