Low-Threat High-Challenge Formative Quizzes

I have been trailing quizzes as a form of formative assessment and progress check for my year 11 ATAR Physics class (similar to AS level or AP Physics).  The goals I had when implementing these were: 

• For students to be exposed to test difficulty questions under test conditions (high challenge)
• For formative purposes only (low threat)
• I would be able to use them to identify student misconceptions (high value)
• They did not create more marking work for me (low effort for the teacher)

The format that I ended up with was multiple choice quizzes which were marked through Google Forms, and below I have discussed some of my learnings about these quizzes.

Answers to multiple choice questions need to all be plausible

When using multiple choice questions each answer needs to be a possible answer that a student could calculate, as shown in the conservation of momentum question below. 

The working out for the correct answer to this question is as follows:

Each of the answers identify the following likely errors

        Answer (A):  Incorrect conversion from g to kg.

        Answer (B):  Does not add mass of bullet to mass of block for final momentum.

        Answer (C):  Correct answer.

        Answer (D):  Does not convert from g to kg.

 

The importance of each answer being a possible error or misconception is that if students make the expected error, but they do not see their answer as one of the options they will either check their working and find the mistake (which is not so bad) or take a guess at the correct answer which I don't want to happen, as it means I can't diagnose misconceptions.  In this sense, there is no need to be constrained to four answers, put as many answers as you can think of errors and misconceptions, without making it easy for students to guess the correct answer.

Answer feedback or detective work?

Google forms has the functionality to provide answer feedback, so for the above question you could provide the following as feedback:

        If you chose answer (A):    Check your conversion from g to kg. Remember there are 1000g to 1kg

        If you chose answer (B):    Check your final mass of block and bullet. Have you added the mass of                                                     the bullet to the mass of the block?

        If you chose answer (C):    Correct answer, well done!

        If you chose answer (D):    Check if you converted the mass of the bullet from g to kg.

My preference is not to provide feedback to students through Google Forms as I'd rather they worked harder to find their error (make the feedback detective work), and if they are really stuck then I can spend time with the student to resolve the misconception.  However, if I was in a remote learning scenario then this feedback function would be useful.

Make the marks visible to students and parents

The quizzes I used with my year 11 students did not go towards their grades, however I have the ability to enter the marks into our marks book with a zero weighting.  If students know that the results are going to visible to both them and their parents they take the process more seriously.

The multiple choice quizzes are imperfect

With written calculation questions there are marks for selecting the correct equations, rearranging equations and working.  With a multiple choice question students are either completely right or completely wrong, so the quiz does not necessarily reflect how students will go in a test or exam.

Students appreciate the quizzes

I have been using these quizzes about a week before tests, and students have responded very positively to them.  They are low-threat, so it takes the pressure off, but at the same time high-challenge, so students get a clear idea of how prepared they are for an upcoming test. 

If you have any questions about this, or would like to see some samples of a quiz and Google Form then please contact me through twitter. I hope you find this blog post useful!

Dan (@dan_braith) 

Meaning through Sentences

In my teaching practice I have been rapidly moving away from PowerPoint presentations as a way for students to engage with content for various reasons, and a recent twitter post by Oliver Caviglioli (@olicav) articulated one of those reasons in a succinct way.  

Oliver Caviglioli's twitter post

The essence of the post is that meaning is more clearly conveyed with a sentence than a slide of bullet points. Oliver's reference was related to presenting to an audience, but there are some clear links to the way that we present information to students which I am going to explore in this blog post.

Take for example the following set of slides on forces which would be delivered as part of the same lesson.  

Ignore the issues these slides have with their design (which is distracting) and that some of the information is incorrect (forces are also acting when things are not moving, or not changing their shape, speed, or motion).  Instead focus on the content that they are trying to convey.  

If we assume that when the writer of these slides refers to a force, they mean a net unbalanced force, then through these slides students are presented with the following fragmented information:

• When things move a net unbalanced force has acted.
• A net unbalanced force can change an object's shape, speed and direction.

If we were to present this same information in a single sentence we could write:

When a net unbalanced force acts on an object it will change the object's shape, speed or direction.

Our fragmented information has been consolidated into one sentence. Importantly, we have linked different ideas together and conveyed meaning* through the sentence with words such as "when", "acts" "will change".  Then as a teacher we can (as Oliver Caviglioli suggests) step aside, talk, and ask and answer questions.  In a science lesson this sentence could be accompanied by some demonstrations of net unbalanced forces in action, and potentially 'dual coding' the sentence using an input-output diagram.

We could take this even further and put multiple sentences together into short paragraphs, and give students notes rather than copy slides of bullet points, as I have blogged about here.

I hope you find this blog post useful!

Dan (@dan_braith) 

*If you want to think more about conveying meaning through sentences and diagrams (and knowledge schema) I found "How To Organise Ideas Using Dual Coding" By Oliver Caviglioli and Seneca very useful.

Does friction always oppose motion?

Does friction always oppose motion?

A recent discussion on twitter, started by the question below, prompted me to write this blog.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1263828037189206017

To many of us the diagram looks wrong. If the runner is moving forwards, shouldn't the force arrow of friction be pointing backwards?  After all,  friction is a force that always opposes motion, isn't it?  Well, the answer is both yes, and no. It depends on what motion you are talking about. let me explain.

Consider a sprinter who is pushing off a starting block. If we look at the forces involved we see that the sprinter is applying a force on the starting block backwards and downwards. The starting block applies an equal and opposite force on the sprinter (Newton's Third Law). Importantly in this example, the force which is in the direction of motion is the force applied by the starting blocks on the sprinter.

The forces acting between a sprinter and starting block

Now consider a person running upright on a flat track.  Similarly to the sprinter above, the runner's legs are applying a force backwards. We can be sure of this because the at the point of contact between the runners shoe and the track, the shoe moves backwards.  The track applies an equal and opposite force on the sprinter (Newton's Third Law), and this is because of friction.  This is where friction opposes motion.  Not the overall motion of the runner, but the motion of the runner's foot when it is in contact with the track.  We can then say that the force applied to the runner in the forwards direction is the friction force.

The Forces acting between a person running upright on a flat track and the track

Now consider a car moving forwards, with the car tyre in contact with a road surface.  Assuming that the car is front wheel drive, the tyres are applying a force on the road surface backwards. We can be sure of this because the at the point of contact between the tyre and the road surface, the tyre moves backwards.  The road surface applies an equal and opposite force on the car (Newton's Third Law), and this is because of friction.  This again is where friction opposes motion.  Not the overall motion of the car, but the motion of the car tyre when it is in contact with the road surface.  We can then say that the force applied to the car in the forwards direction is the friction force.

The Forces acting between a car tyre and a road surface

So, Does friction always oppose motion? Only when two surfaces are in contact with each other.  All of a runner and all of a car are not in contact with another surface (unless we consider air to be a surface), but importantly, a part of a runner or a car is in contact with another surface.  When we inspect the forces and motion at these points of contact we find a shoe and a tyre moving backwards, and applying a force in the backwards direction.  We also find friction between the surfaces applying a force in the forwards direction.

I hope you find this blog post useful.

Dan (@dan_braith) 

Cognitive Load Theory: The transient information, split attention, redundancy, and modality effects

The transient information, split attention, redundancy, and, modality effects

Cognitive load theory is a model of human cognition that splits the way we learn into two parts, working memory and long-term memory. 

Working memory can be described as out conscious thought at any moment in time, and is limited in two ways; it is restricted to about four items (+/- 1 or 2) at any one time, and has a limited duration in that once something else has our attention the information is gone.

Long-term memory is where information that we have memorised is stored as schema.  As we learn and memorise new item of information, we build these new items into existing schema and in this way schemas in long-term memory grow into multidimensional ‘chunks’.  Importantly, there is no known limit to how many or how complex schemas can be.

The power of having information in the form of schemas in long-term memory is that schema in long-term memory can be drawn into working memory and only take up the space of four items.

Cognitive Load Theory: A Model of Cognition

Research into cognitive load theory has identified many implications for instruction called ‘effects’ (such as the worked example effect which I have written about here).  In this blog I want to discuss four of these effects which I think every teacher can apply to their instruction all of the time.  These effects are the transient information effect, the split attention effect, the redundancy effect, and the modality effect.

The Transient Information Effect:

The transient information effect occurs when learners are being asked to integrate multiple items of sequential transient (spoken or video) information. In this case the item and duration limits of working memory are exceeded. Earlier information disappears from the learners working memory and therefore can’t be integrated with the more recent information being presented.

The Split Attention Effect:

The split attention effect occurs when learners are being asked to direct their attention to two or more sources of information that are separated by space (in different locations) or time.  A good example of this is having to flip backwards and forwards in a book to understand something.  The limits of working memory are exceeded because learners have to hold partial information in working memory whilst they switch, and then integrate another source of information.

The Redundancy Effect:

The redundancy effect occurs when learners are presented with information which is not related to the intended learning, or when presented with duplicates of essentially the same information.  Valuable working memory capacity is used as learners either search for connections between relevant and irrelevant information, or attempt to integrate the same information simultaneously.  An Example of when the redundancy effect occurs is when a teacher reads verbatim notes from a PowerPoint slide.

The Modality Effect:

Working memory appears to have two channels, one for auditory information and anther for visual information. These two channels are not isolated, but work together when processing and integrating new information.  When these auditory and visual channels are encoded together (called dual coding), a ‘double trace’ aids later retrieval.  In addition to this, when done effectively working memory capacity can be increased (but not doubled).  There are some important caveats to ensure that dual coding is applied effectively.

·      The auditory and visual information must rely on each other effectively

·      The information complexity needs to be high.

·      The auditory component needs to be short enough to be processed in working memory.

If you want to learn more about the modality effect then I suggest getting hold of a copy of Dual Coding With Teachers by Oliver Caviglioli.

Application:

The cognitive load theory effects describe above can be applied to instruction using the following principles:

• Focus: Have a laser-sharp focus on what you want your students to learn for a given lesson, or sequence of lessons.
• Cut and Declutter: Once you have focused on what you want your students to learn remove (or avoid adding) any information that is redundant and has the potential to unnecessarily exceed working memory limits.  Then declutter and simplify the presentation of information.  I have written about this process here.
• Reduce Transient Information: Ensure that all key transient information is recorded permanently for students to access.
• This includes any videos or animations.
• Add Modality: If it makes sense to, add simple diagrams and present information in the form of knowledge organizers.  In general it is better to avoid cluttered photos or busy videos because these include a lot of redundant and distracting information which take up valuable working memory capacity.
• Synchronise and Reduce Transiency: Present all relevant information at the same time, and ensure that all key information is written down for learners.  Then make sure that any verbal explanations are directly relevant to what the visuals that students are looking at.  It is important that any verbal explanations are kept short (ideally short enough to be only one element in working memory).

Applying the transient information the split attention, the redundancy, and the modality effects

See here If you want to learn more about cognitive load theory

I hope you find this blog post useful.

Dan (@dan_braith) 

The Worked Example Effect

The Worked Example Effect

Before I spent a good chunk of last year reading about Cognitive Load Theory I would find myself falling into the trap of telling my physics students who are struggling to do more problems.  It is probably in part due to the pervasive view in education that it is always better if a student figures something out for themselves (if the student discovers it). 

The worked example effect (one of the many ‘effects’ that have come out of research into Cognitive Load Theory) stands opposed this the view that it is always better for learners (and particularly novice learners), to discover something for themselves, and suggests instead that it is always better for a learner to be presented with multiple clear, well-structured and logically sequenced worked examples.  Simply put, novice learners benefit more from studying worked examples than spending the equivalent time on problem solving.

The reason that the worked example effect is more effective than problem solving comes down to schema, and the way that experts and novices approach problems.  When experts are faced with a novel problem they use existing schema, which is a large store of procedural and content knowledge in long-term memory that they draw on.  This leads to automated complex thought processes where the correct set of moves to make seems clear.  The experts understand how and why they have achieved the goal.

In contrast novices, when faced with a novel problem, tend to start by focusing the goal (in physics this is finding the answer), and then work backwards using means-end analysis.  A nice example of means-end analysis is finding your way through a maze for the first time, using trial-and-error to find a path through the maze. You may achieve the goal, but not know how or why you got there.  This process puts extraordinary burdens of working memory, and often means that students fail to build schema beyond the surface structure of a problem.

Problem Solving: Novices vs Experts

I think you can see this happening where students appear to be successfully solving lots of problems in class and at home, but in a test or exam can’t solve similar problems. What is happening is the students are using means-end analysis problem solving techniques for each question, eventually solving the problem, but not having a clear idea of how or why they solved the problem.  They are essentially memorising how to solve a variety of different problems, without building a strong schema of understanding.

The goal then, when providing students with worked examples, is to build expert schema (a large store of procedural and content knowledge).  This is only achieved if the worked examples reduce the students extraneous cognitive load.  The worked examples have to be clear, well structured, logically sequenced, and expose expert schema.

Its not enough to provide students with example after example, lesson after lesson, because there is no way for you as a teacher to check for understanding; to check that schema has been built, so time needs to be allocated for students to work independently on similar questions, and for teachers to use this time to check and correct student understanding.

In my teaching practice I have found that finding time to check for understanding has been difficult, as a complex worked example could take the better part of a lesson, when allowing for my explanations and student questions along the way.  To overcome this I have been providing pre-written worked examples that I discuss with the students in class.  I find that this takes about half the time that doing the same question on the board because I don’t have to write the information down, and I don’t have to wait for students to catch up with their notes.  I have also observed the following advantages:

• Students can focus on how the question was answered, rather than copying down notes.
• When one student answers a question, all students hear and engage with the answer, rather that just those who are caught up with their notes.
• The example is laid out in a way that I would do it, and no information is lost whilst students are copying off the board.

Below are some examples of my pre-written worked examples.  I think that the steps taken to solve a problem need to be clearly identified, so I sequence my examples using the steps I took as headings.  I also provide explanatory notes to clarify where I feel that this needs to be written down.

Electric Fields Worked Example

Magnetic Fields and Forces on electric currents/charges

See here If you want to learn more about cognitive load theory

I hope you find this blog post useful.

Dan (@dan_braith) 


References:

Clark, R.E., Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J. (2012). Putting Students on the Path to Learning: The Case for Fully Guided Instruction. American Educator, v36 n1 p6-11 Spr 2012

Sweller, J., Ayres, P. L., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer. 

How Dual Coding With Teachers changed the way I present

How Dual Coding With Teachers changed the way I present

It was early 2019 that two things happened at about the same time.  First, Edu-twitter was exploding with Oliver Caviglioli inspired graphics, and I was reading about Cognitive Load Theory, and planning to present on it at a conference.   I ordered "the book" (Dual Coding With Teachers) but continued with my presentation after being inspired by the graphics I saw on twitter.   My walls of text were transformed into the following slides.

After Dual Coding With Teachers arrived I analysed my slides agains the advice in the book, and saw the following problems with my slides:

• The fear of white space: Information was pushed right to the edges of the slides.
• The urge to cram lots of information in: There was too much information across the slides.
• The urge to be 'artistic': There was not a clear grid, and the slides were too random in the placement of information.

I already had my key content, but this needed to be rationalised, so I went about changing my slides in the following ways:

• Clarify purpose: Figure out exactly what it is that you want to communicate to the target audience.
• Organise sequence: Cull irrelevant and duplicated points, group ideas, and fit these ideas into a narrative.
• Align content: Fit the information into a grid
• Restrain design: Ensure that colours, images and text are consistent, and leave plenty of white space.

The result was that the original six slides were condensed into one slide shown below.  When I presented on this slide I discussed most of the information on those original six slides, but in a more coherent way which didn't overwhelm the audience with slide fatigue.

I originally thought that Dual Coding with Teachers would help me to improve the design of my presentation slides, which it did, but it provided more than that.  The process of organising information simply and visually helped me to clarify the information I wanted to share, in both my own thoughts, and within the presentation.

If you haven't purchased a copy of Dual Coding with Teachers yet, I can't recommend it highly enough. I think it has value for anyone who presents information in any profession.

Dan (@dan_braith)

More notes about notes

More notes about notes 

In my first blog I wrote about using note sheets for teaching year 8 earth science, rather than have students copy out notes for themselves.  

After this initial success, tried the Same method when teaching Newton's 2nd law of motion to a year 10 class, and it did not go as well as I had hoped. Students, for the most part, appreciated not having to copy out the notes. However, it was clear to me that students were more confused than when I last taught the same lesson last year using PowerPoint. So what happened? 

After speaking to some students after the lesson, their feedback was that they missed having time to process information and then having the information explained by the teacher. On my reflections of this I think that the note sheets (in the format I am using) work when element interactivity (complexity) is low, but don’t work in the same way when element interactivity is high.

If we contrast a year 8 lesson on igneous rocks with a year 10 lesson on Newton’s Second Law then I think you’ll see what I mean.

In a year 8 lesson on igneous rocks  students learn that igneous rocks form from the cooling of magma or lava, that there are two types of igneous rocks depending on where the rock formed (above or below the surface of the Earth), and that these two types can be identified by crystal size.  There is also very little prior knowledge needed to access this content.

In a year 10 lesson on Newton’s Second Law students learn that the acceleration of an object  is proportional to the size of the net force acting on that object, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object.  Students also need to solve questions using the F=ma equation and rearrange the equation to solve for mass and acceleration.  In addition to this students need at least the following prior knowledge: understand acceleration, understand Newton’s First Law, know what a force is, and know how proportionality and inverse proportionality work.

A lesson on Newton’s Second Law clearly has more parts (elements) that interact and support each other (interactivity) as students learn.  An advantage that using PowerPoint provided in this circumstance is that it requires information to be broken down into what can be presented on one slide.  Using PowerPoint I will usually have students copy down notes, and then I’ll spend some time explaining, discussing and questioning before moving onto the next slide.

By using a note sheet instead, I attempted to cram all of those discussions into one longer discussion at the start of the lesson. As students started to answer a set of (what I thought were) well crafted questions I was seeing repeated misunderstandings from lots of students.  I simply attempted to explain too much complex information in too short a time-frame.

So, for a lesson where element interactivity is high, the PowerPoint method was superior because there is a limit to how much information can go on one slide, and so allows for a stepped and structured approach.

In general I am keen to move away from having students spending valuable teaching time copying notes, but my current note sheet method is not up to the task of effectively teaching content with high element interactivity.  Over the next few weeks I’ll be rethinking how I approach such content in the classroom.

Back to the drawing board!

Dan (@dan_braith)