FL: CCTEL - Learner Analysis

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

3 comments:

Bronwyn hegarty22 August 2013 at 19:40
Wow Jacqueline this is a fantastic post. I really love the graphics! You have given us a wonderful in-depth analysis of the learners in your group, and come up with some refreshing perspectives about learning preferences. It would have been okay to link back to the analysis you did for Flexible Learning but this is even better and prettier. :)

Who would have thought about procrastination as a learning style we need to consider but it is so relevant as it does create a huge barrier for learners. I am keen to try out the Procrastinator Assessment Quiz - have you done it with your students?

You have shared some wonderful resources, and what a massive amount of material you have explored.

All aspects for this assessment are covered in detail. One question, where do your students sit in the diagram about the stakeholders diagram? Are they the therapists/clients?

Re the use of the term resistant, perhaps they are cautious or lacking in confidence rather than resistant per se. You may find the concept of self-efficacy and learning and intrinsic motivation useful to explore in relation to these learners.

"Self efficacy is commonly defined as the belief in one's capabilities to achieve a goal or an outcome. Students with a strong sense of efficacy are more likely to challenge themselves with difficult tasks and be intrinsically motivated" (Kirk, n.d). Taken from
Self-Efficacy: Helping Students Believe in Themselves.

There is also lots of information in research articles available about this area, and this web article is a good overview to start with if you are interested. Perhaps this could be the direction you take when thinking about designing learning approaches for assessment 3.
Unknown23 August 2013 at 00:43
Hi Bronwyn

Thank you so much for your feedback. Much appreciated! Now I feel that I can properly move on to the next task.

I did try the Procrastinator Assessment Quiz and it was rather interesting and quite accurate.

In my context, there is no Internet available, so it is most unlikely that I can do that test with the students, but - if students would be interested in it, I can always give them the link, so they could 'check it out' over their weekend leave or if they go to the Library in their free time where they can use the Internet.

Then again, it is a fine line in my context not to 'meddle' with the therapists expertise of work. Procrastination is bound to be addressed in the rest of the program. Saying that, the therapists might actually be interested in that link as well.

Stakeholder question: The students are called 'students' in my class but 'clients' in the rest of the program. For the purpose of my graphics, it would have been more accurate if I used the word students. Thank you for pointing that out.

Also - thank you for that fantastic article! Reading through it was rather interesting and helpful.

If I use the words low self-esteem and lack of self-confidence rather than low self-efficancy within my context, then it is quite accurate to say that most students arrive in Art class with low self-esteem and a lack of self-confidence (low self-efficancy).

For the students, which I call resistant: They most likely have the same 'lows' but might have covered up that fact with very stubborn, negative, unpleasant and resistant behavior.
As it is not my job to 'fix' their behavior - and if they still are resistant after a few attempts to find something creative in which they might be interested in - my strategy is still the same: leave them to do their own thing (unless it affects the group then I will talk to a therapist and/or send that resistant person to see a therapist, if their behavior becomes very interruptive in Art class).

I also find it interesting that a resistant learner in my context often seems to come across as over-confident.

There are two scenarios, which happen with the resistant learners: Either they 'mellow out' and reluctantly (resistantly) do something creative or one day they won't be in Art class, because they were asked to leave the program while I wasn't there.

This also shows me that their resistance went throughout the entire program and wasn't specific to Art class, hence even the therapists couldn't get past their resistance.

I find that low-efficacy learners can usually be helped.
That article has some good points about how to do that. It also confirmed for me that some of the approaches I take in Art class seem to be appropriate with low efficacy learners, which was great to read about, so thank you again for posting that link!

Bronwyn hegarty11 September 2013 at 15:52
Good points Jacqueline. Some people always "think they know it all" and can be all bluster but with little substance. Often the quiet steady ones get a lot further - hence the rabbit and the tortoise story rings so true. I am looking forward to reading all your burgeoning posts that seem to have slipped past me.

FL

Saturday, 27 July 2013

CCTEL - Learner Analysis

3 comments:

About Me