Closing The 2-Sigma Gap Eight Strategies to Replicate One-to-One Tutoring in Blended Learning

Closing the 2-Sigma Gap

Eight Strategies to Replicate

One-to-One Tutoring

in Blended Learning

David W. Denton

David A. Wicks

Vicki Eveland

Seattle Pacific University

Sloan Consortium Blended Learning Conference, 2013

Closing the 2 Sigma Gap

Definitions

(Bloom, 1984)

Effects

(Bloom, 1984)

How can instructors replicate

characteristics of one-to-one tutoring in

blended learning courses?

Variables for Consideration

Improving instructional materials

Enhancing peer interactions

Considering student differences

Engaging higher mental processes

Eight Strategies


1 Quantity of Instruction

2 Cues and Explanations


3 Cooperative Learning

4 Class Environment


5 Tutorial Instruction

6 Feedback


7 Metacognitive Training

8 Goals

Improving Instructional Materials

1 Quantity of instruction

2 Cues and explanations


The amount of guidance, preparation, & coaching provided to students in a course

Blended learning offers the opportunity for increased quantity of instruction

Better practices

Concise organization of materials, management

Differentiate between online and face-to-face components

Realistic expectations regarding complexity of content

Accountability, feedback, and reflection

Metacognitive training

(Abdullah, 2012; Nissen & Tea, 2012)

Improving Quantity of Instruction

Online resources showing what or how

Face time to coach students through application

Linking students to additional resources

Access to review material for particularly challenging content

Providing resources and instruction for a student to access at convenience


Information or questions shared by instructor or students to help scaffold understanding

Improving Cues and Explanations

Instructional decision-making tree Face time to understand nonverbal expressions Asynchronous discussions to allow time to reflect prior to responding Web conference to understand nonverbal expressions if face time isn't available

(Frey & Fisher, 2010)

Enhancing Peer Interactions

3 Cooperative learning

4 Class environment


Use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each others' learning

(Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991)

Cognitive Presence

(Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001)

Collaborate on Deliverable

(Charter, Essay, or Presentation)

Complete Deliverable,

Reflect on process

Review Collaborative

Script Questions

Post to Personal Area, Outline Collaborative

Response

Improving Cooperative Learning

1. Choose an appropriate small group project

2. Identify suitable collaborative tools

3. Incorporate a collaborative script

4. Organize the project with phases for major milestones

5. Include specific deadlines for individual and group work

6. Form homogenous or heterogeneous teams

7. Provide training for technology and collaboration techniques

8. Assess evidence of individual-group participation after each phase (process)

9. Request student reflection on collaborative process after each phase

10. Assess deliverables or products after each phase (product)

(Wicks, Lumpe, Denton, 2012)

4 Class Environment

Communication

Characteristics of an Effective LMS

(Elias, 2010; Higgins et al., 2005)

Improving Communication through

LMS Organization

Equitable use

All content online

Simple and intuitive

Interface

Navigation

Tolerance for error

Edit posts

Resubmission

Instructional climate

Regular email contact

Individual consultation

Simple and Intuitive

Organize content

Labels

Considering Student Differences

5 Tutorial instruction

6 Feedback


Individualized instruction that supports regular classroom instruction

Improving Tutorial Instruction

Replace or enhance lectures with short, interactive online tutorials

Provide background material, example problems, problem-solving opportunities

Supply immediate automated feedback

Include face-to-face tutorials using PIM

(Garrison & Vaughan, 2011)

6 Feedback

Information provided by an agent (e.g., teacher, peer, book, parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding

(Hattie & Timperley 2007)

Characteristics of Effective Feedback

Performance criteria, direction for improving

Opportunity for corrections

Efficient, timely delivery

Customized

Developed

Improving Feedback

Developed Conversational tone Opening or closing comment Support comments throughout Avoids identifying same error Beyond brief comments "good"

(McGrath, Taylor, & Pychyl, 2011)

Engaging Higher Mental Processes

7 Metacognitive training

8 Goals


Metacognition - engaging higher mental processes involves metacognitive

and cognitive dimensions

Metacognition focuses on the active participation of the individual in his or

her thinking process

(Stewart and Landine 1995)

Kinds of Metacognitive Knowledge

Strategy

Task

How, when, why, where to

apply strategy

Self

Learner awareness of

strengths and weaknesses

Improving Metacognitive Training

Students engaging in blended learning struggle with managing

time, prioritizing activities, and organizing learning materials so

they may need explicit training in all of the areas of

metacognitive knowledge

(Yang, 2012)

8 Goals

Goal - the end toward which effort is directed

Outcome - something that follows as a result

Objective - an aim, goal, or end of action

Characteristics of Goals

Fact, idea, principle, capability, skill, concept, technique, value, feeling

Specific

Self-assess

Evidence

Improving Goals

Reflective Writing

1. Citation of goal

2. Presentation of evidence

3. Assertion of evidence-competence

4. Summary of what was learned

5. Identification of future steps

(Guldberg & Pilkington, 2007)

Eight Strategies






4 Class Environment



6 Feedback



8 Goals

References Abdulla, D. (2012). Attitudes of college students enrolled in 2-year health care programs towards online learning. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1215-1223.

Bloom, B. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher 13(6), 4-16.

Cowan, J. E. (2012). Strategies for developing a community of practice: Nine years of lessons learned in a hybrid technology education master's program. Techtrends, 56(1), 12-18.

Elisa, T. Universal instructional design principles for Moodle. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(2), 110-124.

Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010). Identifying instructional moves during guided learning. The Reading Teacher, 64(2)

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2011). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. Wiley Publishing.

Guldberg, K. & Pilkington, R. (2007). Tutor roles in facilitating reflection on practice through online discussion. Educational Technology and Society 10(1), 61-72.

Hattie, J. & Timperley, N. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487

Hew, K., & Cheung, W. (2012). Students' use of asynchronous voice discussion in a blended-learning environment: A study of two undergraduate classes. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(4), 360-367.

Higgins, S., et al. (2005). The impact of school environments: A literature review. The Centre for Learning and Teaching School of Education, Communication and Language Science. University of Newcastle.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Report on Higher Education. Washington, DC: George Washington University.

Kim, J. (2012). A study on learners' perceptional typology and relationships among the learner's types, characteristics, and academic achievement in a blended e-education environment. Computers & Education, 59(2), 304-315.

McGrath, A. L., Taylor, A., & Pychyl, T. A. (2011). Writing helpful feedback: The influence of feedback type on students’ perceptions and writing performance. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-16.

Nissen, E., & Tea, E. (2012). Going blended: New challenges for second generation L2 tutors. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 145-163.

Office of Educational Technology (2013). Expanding evidence approaches for learning in a digital world. United Stated Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/technology/files/2012/12/Expanding_Evidence_Approaches_DRAFT.pdf

Rourke, L., Anderson, T. Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous, text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51-70.

Stewart, J., & Landine, J. (1995). Study skills from a metacognitive perspective. Guidance & Counseling, 11(1), 16-20.

Strauss, V. (September, 2012). Three fears about blended learning. The Washington Post.

Wicks, D., Lumpe, A., Denton, D. (2012). Ten Strategies to Enhance Collaborative Learning in an Online Course. 18th Annual Sloan-C International Conference on Online Learning. Orlando, FL.

Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: A pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), 1-17.

Yang, Y. (2012). Blended learning for college students with English reading difficulties. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(5), 393-410.