FL: July 2013

Learner Analysis

I have been wondering: How am I going to not repeat a lot of what I have already mentioned about my learners and the course context / content in the Flexible Learning Blog, particularly in the posts: 'Flexible Learning', 'Diversity' and 'Strategies'?

I have decided to start with some graphics, hoping this will offer a very basic, visual overview.

After that, I will progress to briefly look at the stakeholders, learning styles and goals for the design phase.

1st basic graph:

1. Learner Diversity

Graphs 2, 3 and 4 describe: learner environment, pedagogical approach and course delivery:

2. Learner Environment

3. Pedagogical Approach

4. Program Delivery

Who are the stakeholders?

Financial investment & Interest in Outcome

Learning Styles

In this section, I will briefly look at group learning dynamics first, followed by some individual learning styles, concluding with some thoughts on learning styles in general.

The Group

I have noticed that the overall group can sometimes develop a 'group learning style'. These group dynamics, divided into four categories, can begin with just one - or a few - students and then affect the entire group.

Group Dynamic Learning Style

The enthusiastic group:

This is a fantastic group to facilitate and it is a joy to be in this class.

It is easy to supply supportive information for their individual projects, using research printouts or appropriate books, adding to their already existing creative flow and enthusiasm - because - this group is eager to learn about what they are doing, to what level they can take their projects and how they can use their creative skills in the future. This group does not mind moving out of their creative comfort zone for their learning.

The non-commited group:

This group dynamic is neither 'here nor there'. The students don't mind being in class but aren't particularly enthusiastic about their learning either. Where the enthusiastic group is comparable to a brightly burning fire, here we have glowing embers. This group likes to stay in their creative comfort zone for their learning.

The resistant group:

In my experience, it only takes one person to set their mind on being resistant to learning to gradually affect the entire group. This behavior seems to attract other peers who will join that 'resistance leader'. This could be considered an 'anti-learning style'. Negative comments seem to be the norm either about other students, their work or the facilitator. This is the most anti-social group dynamic and comparable with a fire wanting to be lit but having water poured on it repeatedly. There is no comfort(able) zone for learning with this dynamic.

The one subject group:

One person will start with a project and other students will choose to do the same. This group dynamic flows well creatively but is limited in creative diversity. Nevertheless, this seems to be the most socially engaged group, as the learners will exchange their knowledge and help each other throughout their projects. This dynamic creates their own creative comfort zone by learning as a group. I believe this is a good example of Social Constructivism (Wikipedia, 2013).

The Individual

When I thought about my ever changing group of learners, what transpired was, that there are four predominant learning styles.

Individual Learning Styles

I am aware that three out of these four could be perceived as 'learning style issues': the procrastinator, impulsive and resistant learner.

A brief look at the four different learning styles

The Procrastinator Learner:

This learning style accounts for the majority of my students.

According to Wlodkowsky, (2005), there are 6 different versions of procrastinating:

If anyone would like to take the Procrastinator Assessment Quiz, here is the link:

http://userpages.umbc.edu/~koconne1/605TheAdultLearner/quizInstructions.htm

The Impulsive Learner:

I have not found much information during my research about a typical, impulsive learner. I do have quite a few students, which will ‘do things without thinking first’ (impulsive) and learn from their mistakes as they go (maybe). This is definitely a way to learn from one's mistakes.

The Goal Orientated Learner:

There are a few learners, which will choose a project on the first day, then work through the appropriate stages conscientiously and with focus (goal motivated).

The Resistant Learner:

Luckily, I do not have too many resistant learners. The few I have had were a real challenge.

Through experience in this particular facilitating context, I have found that there is no point in engaging too much with a resistant learner, as focusing on that behavior seemed to encourage it.

Unless it does affect the group, non-engagement has worked wonders.

Every one of the resistant learners did eventually ‘create something’ during the 8-weeks, dropping their resistance when they were left alone.

There is an interesting article, written by J. Mbuva (2007): Understanding Ways of Motivating Resistant Students to Learning: From Theory to Practice, which addresses various aspects of the resistant learner and the impact this can have.

The link to this article is:

http://www.nssa.us/journals/2007-29-1/2007-29-1-16.htm

Thoughts on Learning Styles

To look into diverse learning styles has certainly been very interesting.

Felder (2013), provides some perceptive examples, titled: 'Meet Your Students'.
Reading through them, I can find my own learning style(s) and recognized some of my students'.

Links to some of his examples:

1. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 1. Stan and Nathan." Chem. Engr. Education, 23(2), 68-69 (Spring 1989). The sensing learning and the intuitive learner.

2. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 2. Susan and Glenda." Chem. Engr. Education, 24(1), 7-8 (Winter 1990). The sequential learner and the global learner.

3. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 3. Michelle, Rob, and Art." Chem. Engr. Education, 24(3), 130-131 (Summer 1990). Three different approaches to learning (deep, surface, and strategic), and the conditions that induce students to take a deep approach.

4. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 4. Jill and Perry." Chem. Engr. Education, 25(4), 196-197 (Fall 1991). The judger and the perceiver on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

5. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 5. Edward and Irving." Chem. Engr. Education, 28(1), 36-37 (Winter 1994). The extravert and the introvert on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, and to a good approximation, the active learner and reflective learner on the Index of Learning Styles.

6. R.M. Felder, "Meet Your Students: 6. Tony and Frank." Chem. Engr. Education, 29(4), 244-245

(Fall 1995). The thinker and the feeler on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 

Kinesthetic and Visual Learning Styles:

In my teaching context, kinesthetic and visual learning styles, as mentioned by Flemming and Baume (2006), are very helpful to have (or to learn), for Art and Craft related project based learning.

Learner Profile

I think that, what has been described above: learner diversity, learner environment, program delivery, group dynamic and individual learning style, results in a good portion of a learner profile.

I have thought how to add to this and created another visual graph, which helps to describe some further aspects of my learners:

Goals for the Design Phase

Summary of the main points about context and learners

Learners:

- Very diverse cultural backgrounds.

- Skill levels vary from 'not much' to 'quite a lot' of previous Art & Creativity experience -

(often based on vocational / educational background).

- Individual learning styles vary and can be affected by the overall group dynamic.

Course Context:

- Art & Creativity Class is compulsory, as part of an 8-week, live-in program at Addiction Rehab.

- There are a lot of Stakeholders involved.

Course Content / Delivery:

- Learning options are based on: personalized -, project / experiential learning and through building on previous knowledge.

- The course is delivered F2F with books / printouts available. Option to visit the local Library in free time or use Internet for research during weekend leave.

References:

Felder, R. M. (2013). Resources In Science And Engineering Education.

Retrieved from:

http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/RMF.html

Fleming, N. & Baume, D. (2006). Learning Styles Again: VARKing up the right tree!,

Educational Developments, SEDA Ltd, Issue 7.4, Nov. 2006, p4-7.

Retrieved from:

http://www.johnsilverio.com/EDUI6702/Fleming_VARK_learningstyles.pdf

Mbuva, J., Understanding Ways of Motivating Resistant Students to Learning: From

Theory to Practice, (2007). National Social Science Association, USA.

Retrieved from:

http://www.nssa.us/journals/2007-29-1/2007-29-1-16.htm

Social Constructivism (2013). Wikipedia. Retrieved from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructivism

Wlodkowski, R. J. (2005). Adults in modern society are on a lifelong educational journey.

University of Maryland, Baltimore County, USA.

Retrieved from:

http://userpages.umbc.edu/~koconne1/605TheAdultLearner/obstacles.htm

FL

Saturday, 27 July 2013

CCTEL - Learner Analysis

About Me