Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback

Stephen J. Krause, Dale R. Baker, Adam R. Carberry, Terry L. Alford, Jane Ankeny, Milo Koretsky, Bill Jay Brooks, Cindy Waters, Brady J. Gibbons, Sean Maass, Candace Chan

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Well-designed formative feedback has the potential to enhance both instructor teaching and student learning. Initially, developing a formative feedback process takes some effort, but once established, requires little effort. The process includes four steps: 1) acquiring data from student reflections; 2) assessing and characterizing student responses in order to diagnose the learning issues that can impede students from achieving their learning goals; 3) designing and synthesizing the type and mode of formative feedback that best addresses the learning issues; and 4) selecting a formative feedback delivery method that quickly communicates to students the information and/or resources that they can use to enhance progress toward their learning goals. Over time, feedback to students on their performance and reflections on topical content has been divided into two general types - one is outcome feedback and the other is information or process feedback. Outcome feedback basically describes whether an outcome of a task is correct or incorrect, which only provides limited guidance for the student. In particular, with traditional lecture-and-test pedagogy, instructors communicate outcome feedback to students that is mainly composed of assessment by grading of homework, quizzes and tests as to whether the work is correct or incorrect. As such, instructors often assume that students can use this limited information to subsequently improve their knowledge and understanding of the content. On the other hand, information or process feedback from data analysis and synthesis of directed feedback provides rich and insightful information to address issues related to students' learning processes. It helps students monitor their construction of knowledge and contributes to the selfregulation that leads to deeper conceptual learning and the achievement of their learning goals. There are many methods for acquiring student reflection responses, but in this paper we will focus on the steps of the feedback process when using end-of-class "Muddiest Point" (MP) student reflections. These arise from a class topic for which students are monitoring the learning issues that arise in the course of class instruction and may impede their understanding of content. The first step in the process is data collection, which is now automated with Concept Warehouse (CW), cw.edudiv.org, a web-enabled resource developed by Milo Koretsky at Oregon State University. The second step is using the responses to characterize and diagnose student learning issues. There are a variety of types of Student Learning Issues and Misconceptions (SLIMs) that impede learning. Some of these include knowledge gaps, vocabulary gaps, (misunderstood, misused, incorrect or missing words) and skill gaps which can include missing or faulty skills in problem calculations, analysis, computation, and graph construction, reading and interpretation. The third step is to address the nature of the type of learning issue and synthesize the formative process feedback response using the most suitable mode (verbal, visual, videos, graphical, tabular, etc.). This helps facilitate self-regulation of their learning by monitoring, assessing, and adjusting their learning strategies to achieve their desired learning goals. The fourth step is to communicate the feedback response with a simple delivery method, such as next-class slides, email, Blackboard, or the web. In this paper, an example of MP-generated SLIMs related to the introductory materials science topic of eutectic phase diagrams will be given as an example, along with strategies for addressing them. Results on effectiveness and impact of such formative process feedback for a whole materials course will also be presented and discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings
PublisherAmerican Society for Engineering Education
Publication statusPublished - 2014
Event121st ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: 360 Degrees of Engineering Education - Indianapolis, IN, United States
Duration: Jun 15 2014Jun 18 2014

Other

Other121st ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: 360 Degrees of Engineering Education
CountryUnited States
CityIndianapolis, IN
Period6/15/146/18/14

Fingerprint

Materials science
Students
Feedback
Monitoring
Warehouses
Electronic mail
Eutectics
Phase diagrams

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

Krause, S. J., Baker, D. R., Carberry, A. R., Alford, T. L., Ankeny, J., Koretsky, M., ... Chan, C. (2014). Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings American Society for Engineering Education.

Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback. / Krause, Stephen J.; Baker, Dale R.; Carberry, Adam R.; Alford, Terry L.; Ankeny, Jane; Koretsky, Milo; Brooks, Bill Jay; Waters, Cindy; Gibbons, Brady J.; Maass, Sean; Chan, Candace.

ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education, 2014.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Krause, SJ, Baker, DR, Carberry, AR, Alford, TL, Ankeny, J, Koretsky, M, Brooks, BJ, Waters, C, Gibbons, BJ, Maass, S & Chan, C 2014, Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback. in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education, 121st ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: 360 Degrees of Engineering Education, Indianapolis, IN, United States, 6/15/14.
Krause SJ, Baker DR, Carberry AR, Alford TL, Ankeny J, Koretsky M et al. Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education. 2014
Krause, Stephen J. ; Baker, Dale R. ; Carberry, Adam R. ; Alford, Terry L. ; Ankeny, Jane ; Koretsky, Milo ; Brooks, Bill Jay ; Waters, Cindy ; Gibbons, Brady J. ; Maass, Sean ; Chan, Candace. / Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education, 2014.
@inproceedings{e66de70d7658484cab41fed2c055af65,
title = "Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback",
abstract = "Well-designed formative feedback has the potential to enhance both instructor teaching and student learning. Initially, developing a formative feedback process takes some effort, but once established, requires little effort. The process includes four steps: 1) acquiring data from student reflections; 2) assessing and characterizing student responses in order to diagnose the learning issues that can impede students from achieving their learning goals; 3) designing and synthesizing the type and mode of formative feedback that best addresses the learning issues; and 4) selecting a formative feedback delivery method that quickly communicates to students the information and/or resources that they can use to enhance progress toward their learning goals. Over time, feedback to students on their performance and reflections on topical content has been divided into two general types - one is outcome feedback and the other is information or process feedback. Outcome feedback basically describes whether an outcome of a task is correct or incorrect, which only provides limited guidance for the student. In particular, with traditional lecture-and-test pedagogy, instructors communicate outcome feedback to students that is mainly composed of assessment by grading of homework, quizzes and tests as to whether the work is correct or incorrect. As such, instructors often assume that students can use this limited information to subsequently improve their knowledge and understanding of the content. On the other hand, information or process feedback from data analysis and synthesis of directed feedback provides rich and insightful information to address issues related to students' learning processes. It helps students monitor their construction of knowledge and contributes to the selfregulation that leads to deeper conceptual learning and the achievement of their learning goals. There are many methods for acquiring student reflection responses, but in this paper we will focus on the steps of the feedback process when using end-of-class {"}Muddiest Point{"} (MP) student reflections. These arise from a class topic for which students are monitoring the learning issues that arise in the course of class instruction and may impede their understanding of content. The first step in the process is data collection, which is now automated with Concept Warehouse (CW), cw.edudiv.org, a web-enabled resource developed by Milo Koretsky at Oregon State University. The second step is using the responses to characterize and diagnose student learning issues. There are a variety of types of Student Learning Issues and Misconceptions (SLIMs) that impede learning. Some of these include knowledge gaps, vocabulary gaps, (misunderstood, misused, incorrect or missing words) and skill gaps which can include missing or faulty skills in problem calculations, analysis, computation, and graph construction, reading and interpretation. The third step is to address the nature of the type of learning issue and synthesize the formative process feedback response using the most suitable mode (verbal, visual, videos, graphical, tabular, etc.). This helps facilitate self-regulation of their learning by monitoring, assessing, and adjusting their learning strategies to achieve their desired learning goals. The fourth step is to communicate the feedback response with a simple delivery method, such as next-class slides, email, Blackboard, or the web. In this paper, an example of MP-generated SLIMs related to the introductory materials science topic of eutectic phase diagrams will be given as an example, along with strategies for addressing them. Results on effectiveness and impact of such formative process feedback for a whole materials course will also be presented and discussed.",
author = "Krause, {Stephen J.} and Baker, {Dale R.} and Carberry, {Adam R.} and Alford, {Terry L.} and Jane Ankeny and Milo Koretsky and Brooks, {Bill Jay} and Cindy Waters and Gibbons, {Brady J.} and Sean Maass and Candace Chan",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
booktitle = "ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings",
publisher = "American Society for Engineering Education",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Characterizing and addressing student learning issues and misconceptions (SLIMs) in materials science with muddiest point reflections and fast formative feedback

AU - Krause, Stephen J.

AU - Baker, Dale R.

AU - Carberry, Adam R.

AU - Alford, Terry L.

AU - Ankeny, Jane

AU - Koretsky, Milo

AU - Brooks, Bill Jay

AU - Waters, Cindy

AU - Gibbons, Brady J.

AU - Maass, Sean

AU - Chan, Candace

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Well-designed formative feedback has the potential to enhance both instructor teaching and student learning. Initially, developing a formative feedback process takes some effort, but once established, requires little effort. The process includes four steps: 1) acquiring data from student reflections; 2) assessing and characterizing student responses in order to diagnose the learning issues that can impede students from achieving their learning goals; 3) designing and synthesizing the type and mode of formative feedback that best addresses the learning issues; and 4) selecting a formative feedback delivery method that quickly communicates to students the information and/or resources that they can use to enhance progress toward their learning goals. Over time, feedback to students on their performance and reflections on topical content has been divided into two general types - one is outcome feedback and the other is information or process feedback. Outcome feedback basically describes whether an outcome of a task is correct or incorrect, which only provides limited guidance for the student. In particular, with traditional lecture-and-test pedagogy, instructors communicate outcome feedback to students that is mainly composed of assessment by grading of homework, quizzes and tests as to whether the work is correct or incorrect. As such, instructors often assume that students can use this limited information to subsequently improve their knowledge and understanding of the content. On the other hand, information or process feedback from data analysis and synthesis of directed feedback provides rich and insightful information to address issues related to students' learning processes. It helps students monitor their construction of knowledge and contributes to the selfregulation that leads to deeper conceptual learning and the achievement of their learning goals. There are many methods for acquiring student reflection responses, but in this paper we will focus on the steps of the feedback process when using end-of-class "Muddiest Point" (MP) student reflections. These arise from a class topic for which students are monitoring the learning issues that arise in the course of class instruction and may impede their understanding of content. The first step in the process is data collection, which is now automated with Concept Warehouse (CW), cw.edudiv.org, a web-enabled resource developed by Milo Koretsky at Oregon State University. The second step is using the responses to characterize and diagnose student learning issues. There are a variety of types of Student Learning Issues and Misconceptions (SLIMs) that impede learning. Some of these include knowledge gaps, vocabulary gaps, (misunderstood, misused, incorrect or missing words) and skill gaps which can include missing or faulty skills in problem calculations, analysis, computation, and graph construction, reading and interpretation. The third step is to address the nature of the type of learning issue and synthesize the formative process feedback response using the most suitable mode (verbal, visual, videos, graphical, tabular, etc.). This helps facilitate self-regulation of their learning by monitoring, assessing, and adjusting their learning strategies to achieve their desired learning goals. The fourth step is to communicate the feedback response with a simple delivery method, such as next-class slides, email, Blackboard, or the web. In this paper, an example of MP-generated SLIMs related to the introductory materials science topic of eutectic phase diagrams will be given as an example, along with strategies for addressing them. Results on effectiveness and impact of such formative process feedback for a whole materials course will also be presented and discussed.

AB - Well-designed formative feedback has the potential to enhance both instructor teaching and student learning. Initially, developing a formative feedback process takes some effort, but once established, requires little effort. The process includes four steps: 1) acquiring data from student reflections; 2) assessing and characterizing student responses in order to diagnose the learning issues that can impede students from achieving their learning goals; 3) designing and synthesizing the type and mode of formative feedback that best addresses the learning issues; and 4) selecting a formative feedback delivery method that quickly communicates to students the information and/or resources that they can use to enhance progress toward their learning goals. Over time, feedback to students on their performance and reflections on topical content has been divided into two general types - one is outcome feedback and the other is information or process feedback. Outcome feedback basically describes whether an outcome of a task is correct or incorrect, which only provides limited guidance for the student. In particular, with traditional lecture-and-test pedagogy, instructors communicate outcome feedback to students that is mainly composed of assessment by grading of homework, quizzes and tests as to whether the work is correct or incorrect. As such, instructors often assume that students can use this limited information to subsequently improve their knowledge and understanding of the content. On the other hand, information or process feedback from data analysis and synthesis of directed feedback provides rich and insightful information to address issues related to students' learning processes. It helps students monitor their construction of knowledge and contributes to the selfregulation that leads to deeper conceptual learning and the achievement of their learning goals. There are many methods for acquiring student reflection responses, but in this paper we will focus on the steps of the feedback process when using end-of-class "Muddiest Point" (MP) student reflections. These arise from a class topic for which students are monitoring the learning issues that arise in the course of class instruction and may impede their understanding of content. The first step in the process is data collection, which is now automated with Concept Warehouse (CW), cw.edudiv.org, a web-enabled resource developed by Milo Koretsky at Oregon State University. The second step is using the responses to characterize and diagnose student learning issues. There are a variety of types of Student Learning Issues and Misconceptions (SLIMs) that impede learning. Some of these include knowledge gaps, vocabulary gaps, (misunderstood, misused, incorrect or missing words) and skill gaps which can include missing or faulty skills in problem calculations, analysis, computation, and graph construction, reading and interpretation. The third step is to address the nature of the type of learning issue and synthesize the formative process feedback response using the most suitable mode (verbal, visual, videos, graphical, tabular, etc.). This helps facilitate self-regulation of their learning by monitoring, assessing, and adjusting their learning strategies to achieve their desired learning goals. The fourth step is to communicate the feedback response with a simple delivery method, such as next-class slides, email, Blackboard, or the web. In this paper, an example of MP-generated SLIMs related to the introductory materials science topic of eutectic phase diagrams will be given as an example, along with strategies for addressing them. Results on effectiveness and impact of such formative process feedback for a whole materials course will also be presented and discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905189056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84905189056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:84905189056

BT - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

PB - American Society for Engineering Education

ER -