CNIE 2015 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm of Pedagogy Thur. May 28th, 11:00 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Katrin Becker © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Who Am I? 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm Katrin Becker, PhD 2 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What am I playing Now? Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 5/12/2016 3 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What are Schools For?      Childcare so parents can work. Socialization (Entrainment to authority) Creation of an efficient underclass of workers. Teaching Good Test-Taking Behavior Schools are:    5/12/2016 hierarchical authoritarian do not encourage personal agency Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm Brenda Laurel 4 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 History of Major Paradigm Shifts Agrarian      Industrial permanence communities specialization extended families slow transportation 1800s      mobility urbanization mechanization nuclear family rapid transportation 1900s Information      extreme mobility urban > rural jobs shift family dispersal massive & rapid transportation 2000s Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. (2013). Reinventing schools : it's time to break the mold. Lanham: Rowman & LIttlefield Education. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 5 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 A New Paradigm in Education? Agrarian     1-on-1 personalized apprenticeship 1-room school house Industrial     mass education age-determined trade schools grades Information ? ~ current system ~ 1800s 1900s 2000s Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. (2013). Reinventing schools : it's time to break the mold. Lanham: Rowman & LIttlefield Education. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 6 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Intro to Reigeluth's Paradigm Big changes in society cause (require) systemic changes in all societal systems. Systemic change is fundamental transformation. Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. (2013). Reinventing schools : it's time to break the mold. Lanham: Rowman & LIttlefield Education. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 7 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 A New Paradigm in Education? Industrial Age          Bureaucratic organization Autocratic leadership Centralized control Adversarial relationships Mass production, etc. Compliance Conformity One-way communications Compartmentalization (Division of Labor) Information Age          Team organization Shared leadership Autonomy, accountability Cooperative relationships Customized production, etc. Initiative Diversity Networking Holism (Integration of tasks) Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. (2013). Reinventing schools : it's time to break the mold. Lanham: Rowman & LIttlefield Education. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 8 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 A New Paradigm in Education? NEW vs problem-solving vs cooperation vs initiative vs OLD factual knowledge competition compliance Reigeluth, C. M., & Karnopp, J. (2013). Reinventing schools : it's time to break the mold. Lanham: Rowman & LIttlefield Education. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 9 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 10 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 11 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Learning vs Sorting Anyone who meets the criteria gets the grades. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 12 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 13 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Learner vs Teacher Centered Provide choice & ownership of learning. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 14 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 15 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Doing vs Listening & Watching What can successful learners do? 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 16 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 17 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Attainment vs Time What you did more important than how long (or even if) you were in class. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 18 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 19 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Customized vs Standardized You determine range of possibilities. THEY get to choose. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 20 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 21 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Criterion vs Norm Poor Norm. Doesn't matter what anyone else can do. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 22 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 23 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Collaborative vs Individual Getting to know your students. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 24 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 What does this new paradigm look like? Learning-focused Learner-centered Learning by doing Attainment-based Customized Criterion-referenced Collaborative Enjoyable 5/12/2016 vs Sorting Focused vs Teacher-centered vs Teacher presented vs Time-based progress vs Standardized instruction vs Norm-referenced vs Individual vs Unpleasant Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 25 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Enjoyable vs Not. What's wrong with having fun? 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 26 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 A Name for This? The use of game elements in non-game contexts. Deterding, S. (2012). 9.5 Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Gamification. Microsoft Research. [Microsoft Research Video] Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/apps/video/dl.aspx?id=174677&l=i on 12 October 2012. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 27 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Questions? Comments? 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 28 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Abstract of Presentation:             Implementing Reigeluth’s Paradigm In his landmark paper describing what the new post-industrial paradigm of instruction should look like, C.M.Reigeluth outlines 8 core ideas: Learning-focused vs. sorting focused. Learner-centered vs. teacher-centered instruction. Learning by doing vs. teacher presenting. Attainment-based vs. time-based progress. Customized vs. standardized instruction. Criterion-referenced vs. norm-referenced testing. Collaborative vs. individual. Enjoyable vs. unpleasant. (Reigeluth, 2012) Most of us can agree that people learn at different rates and have different learning needs, but most of our courses continue to enforce a lock-step progression of topics and assignments that is much better suited to sorting students than to helping them learn. Reigeluth’s new paradigm calls for radical transformation and while that may well be justified, it is unlikely to happen, at least not in the near future. What then can we do in the meantime? This presentation will examine Reigluth’s core ideas through the lenses of their effect on creating access and embracing diversity. The author will include case studies from over 35 years of experience teaching in higher ed. This presentation is targeted at all educators in higher education with a particular focus on the STEM fields. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 29 © K.Becker CNIE 2015 Resources            Becker, K. (2004). Reconciling a Traditional Syllabus with an Inquiry-Based Introductory Course. The Journal of Computing Science in Colleges, 20(2), 28-37. Becker, K. (2006). How much choice is too much? SIGCSE Bull., 38(4), 78-82. doi: 10.1145/1189136.1189176. Becker, K. (2007). Digital Game Based Learning, Once Removed: Teaching Teachers BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, SIG-GLUE Special Issue on Game-Based Learning 2007, 38(3), 478-488. Bogost, I. (2012). Persuasive Games: Exploitationware. Gamasutra. Retrieved from http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6366/persuasive_games_exploitationware.php Charles, D., Charles, T., McNeill, M., Bustard, D., & Black, M. (2011). Game-based feedback for educational multi-user virtual environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 638-654. doi: 10.1111/j.14678535.2010.01068.x. Deci, E. and Ryan, R. (2004). Handbook of Self-Determination Research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Deterding, S. (2012). 9.5 Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Gamification. Microsoft Research. [Microsoft Research Video] Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/apps/video/dl.aspx?id=174677&l=i on 12 October 2012. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification". Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, Finland Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction : game-based methods and strategies for training and education. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Nicholson, S. (2012). A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gamification. Paper presented at the Games + Learning + Society 8.0, Madison, WI. on June 13 Sheldon, L. (2012). The Multiplayer Classroom : Designing Coursework as a Game. Boston, Mass.: Course Technology/Cengage Learning. 5/12/2016 Implementing Reigeluth's Paradigm 30 © K.Becker