Contents Page

Introduction...... 2

Section I: Course design and learning outcomes

Teaching and Learning at University: designing a course of study...... 4

What is to be taught...... 4

How the topic will be taught: level indicators and the curriculum...... 5

What are the appropriate learning objectives: introducing Bloom’s Taxonomy... 6

How will the topic be assessed?...... 11

What constitutes a good final mark?...... 16

Section II: Reflection and metacognition

Aspects of learning theory: Retention and recall...... 18

Reflecting on knowledge and understanding: a brief résumé ...... 19

Reflecting on learning...... 22

Metacognition: reflecting to improve your learning...... 24

The challenge for the student...... 25

Section III: Developing a learning strategy...... 29

A Conclusion...... 31

References and websites...... 32

Introduction

Most of my teaching is done at level 1 (first year). Over the years I have noticed that many students come to university having spent the majority of their time in education learning by rote, that is to say memorising ‘facts’. It is an approach to learning that suits achievement in many A-level topics and it is not surprising that many students have developed this habit. Unfortunately this learning habit is not suited to study at university and is unlikely to lead to good degree classification (e.g. 2:1 and above) and frankly it is also rather dull way to go about learning.

More worryingly, the student who maintains this habitual rote approach will find that each year gets harder and their marks get lower. This occurs because, besides asking you to acquire a wide body of knowledge, a university degree is designed to train you to use that knowledge in more active ways, to understand its implications, to analyse its relationship to other ideas and issues. In other words: to use knowledge to solve problems and clarify confusion.

Applying knowledge in this way requires you to use what are some times called higher order cognitive skills: those of analysis, synthesis and evaluation. These skills involve being reflective and looking around to join one idea with another to see if together they provide an answer to a particular problem or riddle. So while a person might have a wide body of knowledge (i.e. they "know a lot") it is of little value if it is not ‘connected’ and put to some lasting purpose.

For me it is distressing to watch some students struggle with their learning unaware that there are ways to make their learning more fruitful and dynamic, if not more efficient. To this end, this booklet aims to enable you to broaden your learning techniques so that your understanding and appreciation of economics (or any topic for that matter) is more fulfilling and ‘connected’

The challenge has been deciding how to go about achieving this rather ambitious goal, and then finding a way it could be achieved. To start with I thought it best to reduced the task to a series of conditional statements, hunches or arguments, which if achieved should put in place the stepping stones that lead to this goal. These hunches or more correctly theories are as yet untested. Their validity and reliability will be determined by you, if they help you then the theory is correct, if not, well it’s back to the drawing-board!

The theories are:

1)If students know how tutors go about planning a particular course of learning and how they choose its assessment then students will have a better idea of what is expected of them in terms of their approach to learning and study.

2)If students are shown how different levels of understanding and cognitive skills can be classified and identified, then students will be not only be able to better understand the aims of the assessment they encounter, they will be able to evaluate their learning achievements by applying these classifications to their own understanding of a topic.

3)If students are shown how different types of reflection help individuals to ‘make sense’ of the world around them, then students should see the value in taking time to reflect on the material they are expected to learn.

4)If students are so motivated, they canthen use their understanding from the above ‘theories’ to better plan their learning and study time so as to achieve the learning goals they desire. In doing so they are thenbecoming metacognitive.

The goal of this book is then to help you become metacognitive, loosely defined as ‘thinking about thinking’, but as the booklet will show later there is more to it than just thinking about thinking.

The next challenge was to find a way that the all above ideas could be explained to you. I could have devoted some of designated lecture time to discussing these ideas and the implications they have for your learning. But this presupposes that everybody would firstly attend any such lecture and whether you would be able to absorb the message within an hour. So the only way is to write it all up and offer it to you as this booklet. It is a fairly long read, but one you can do in your own time and at your own pace.

The booklet has three sections, section I sets out how a course in economics might be designed and managed (‘theories 1 & 2). Section two builds on this insight by first offering an overview of the theories surrounding reflection in general, it then looks at how reflection can be used to specifically improve your learning Section three finishes suggesting ways you can join all these insights together to formulate a more strategic or metacognitive approach to your learning and revision (theories 3 & 4).

Section I: Course design and learning outcomes

Teaching and learning at University: designing a course of study

In essence the teaching task is a five-stage process based around five questions, where each question identifies an activity the teacher has to decide upon when planning a course of tuition:

The Question / The Teacher's Task is to:
What is to be taught? / Decide on the Purpose and Objectives of the course, and select the appropriate syllabus.
How is the subject to be taught? / Identify the appropriate Curriculum, one that enables the aims and objectives to be achieved.
What are the learning objectives? / Decide on the Aims of the course and, choose the appropriate Assessment Criteria that reflect these Aims and which should be within the capabilities of the student.
How will the topic be assessed? / Choose the appropriate Test Items, those that reflect the aspirations contained in the Aims and Objectives and one suitable to the nature of the syllabus and topic.
What constitutes a good or bad mark? / Devise the Performance Criteria that apply to individual test items or to the overall mark.

Two things should be apparent from the above firstly, that the aims and objectives of a course largely determine the nature of the course and secondly, teachers use a lot of jargon. Some definitions may help:

Syllabus; / Simply a list of the topics which are relevant to the purpose and objectives of the course.
Aims & Learning objectives: / The level of understanding to be achieved. For instance, it might be sufficient for the students to only know the relevant definitions of economic terms and concepts. Conversely it might be the intention that the students develop a detailed and in-depth understanding of the relevant economic concepts. Categorising different levels of understanding is achieved by applying Bloom’s (1956) Taxonomy. These classifications include knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. As will be shown later, these classifications form the basic learning objectives within any given course or topic – even at university level.
Curriculum: / This refers to the way a programme of learning is managed and to what extent the learner takes an active role in the learning process. Put simply there is a spectrum of learning environments or behaviour; at one end of this spectrum, the learning is informal, the approach is decided by the learner themselves – it is entirely self-directed. This might be the case of the armature astrologists, the self taught car mechanic, or the pigeon fancier; the individual sets the pace of learning and is solely responsible for selecting their syllabus and setting their aims. At the other end of the scale the programme of learning (and the pace of learning) is largely directed by an instructor, the learner has little say in selecting the syllabus or setting out the aims and objectives. Since the responsibility for setting the pace of learning rests with the instructor/tutor, the student’s role is more passive than would be the case of the more active self-directed approach. Most of you will be familiar with this style of learning – it’s the way schools organise their teaching. It should come as no surprise then that this formal approach often results in students learning by rote, and the material taught is easily forgotten.
Assessment Criteria and test items: / In formal tuition, the assessment criterions are simply a rewording of the aims e.g., The student should be able to…know…comprehend… apply… analyse… something about or using economic theory. The test item is the way that this knowledge can be assesses (e.g., multiple-choice tests, or an essay that asks them what they know about or can demonstrate using economic ideas and methods)

What is to be taught

‘Economics!’ is the obvious answer but it is not so simple, particularly for a first year course in economics. On many courses it is often a requirement that all students have an A-level in economics, if so it might be enough to start where the A-level left off, but this assumes that all A-levels are the same, and that the grades achieved are comparable across the various examining boards.

Even if there is similarity, it doesn’t follow that all students will have the same abilities or experiences in economics. Typically first year courses in economics also attract students with no prior experience in economics, all in all there is usually a great diversity in the students’ abilities. Against this background the level one tutor also has to be aware of the expectations the level two tutors will have regarding the knowledge base of the students they will be inheriting from level one.

The usual solution is then to assume that all students have no prior knowledge in economics and then select a syllabus that will prepare the student for study at level two. So while the students with A-level economics will be familiar with some of the topics – it does not follow that they will be familiar with the focus of the typical level one syllabus. (Those students who assume that a level one introductory course in economics will be a repeat of their A-level will be making a fairly big mistake – more so if they decide to skip the lectures and seminars!)

How the subject is to be taught: Level indicators and the curriculum

The purpose of any course in economics is on developing your knowledge and understanding of it, however, how this understanding is achieved is also important. As a student undertaking a degree it is vital that you understand the meaning of 'degree'. In essence, a degree not only indicates that an individual has a well-developed understanding of a particular topic but has achieved this with a high degree of self-directed learning. Clearly, expecting students to adopt a self-directed learning approach can not always be achieved in one year, so all modules and courses are designed to enable students to move towards this goal.

To aid tutor’s to plan a particular course, all universities will have what are sometimes called level indicators. Usually the level indicator is a number (e.g. I, 2 3 or M), which is attached to the end of all module codes. For instance, the code UPENAA-30-1 (Economic Principles and Applications), indicates that it is a 30 credit module which has a syllabus and curriculum designed to meet expectations found in the level 1 indicator.

Thus each level indicator tells us something about the nature of the course, and is explained in two parts:

The Learning Context: This part details the nature and structure of the syllabus that is deemed to be appropriate for this particular level,

The Learner: Details the level of autonomy and cognitive ability that the student should bedeveloping at this particular level.

For the tutor planning a course, ‘The Learning Context' is essentially telling them how detailed or complex the syllabus should be. 'The Learner' part has two agendas. Firstly it is telling the tutor how the student should achieve this particular level of understanding – it is setting out the intended curriculum for each level. Secondly, it is telling the tutor to what extent the aims of the course should be developing student’s the higher order (cognitive) skills as they progresses through the levels.

If a particular module is to be comparable to other university modules, the tutor is obliged to design their module with these objectives in mind. The level indicators then attempt to marry up the expected aims and objectives of a course with an expected curriculum. Below are the descriptions used by the UWE to define the different levels, the wording is a bit dense so below each I have offered a simple interpretation.

Level indicators

Level 1:
Learning context: / Well defined and structured, wherein the standard techniques of a discipline are specified and applied.
The learner: / within defined guidelines and with limited autonomy, the student should acquire such knowledge/ and skill for discipline(s) and such proficiency or confidence of operation in a learning environment as to ensure further development of academic knowledge/abilities towards professional applications or other applications.
an interpretation; / The body of knowledge is to be delivered in a structured way with a high degree of guidance from the tutor. The objective is to give the student the time and space to actively develop their confidence in dealing with the topic.
Level 2:
Learning context: / Simple but unpredictable or complex but predictable, but which demands application of a wide range of techniques.
The learner: / Is sufficiently organised in quality and quantity of discipline knowledge and skills and academic skills to challenge received wisdom, evaluate own work and report effectively within the appropriate mode of the discipline(s) and conduct straight forward tasks autonomously. Is ready to develop professional working relationships.
an interpretation: / While the body of knowledge should be getting more complex, the student should now be reflecting on and, thinking about, its implications and uses. Similarly, they should be reflecting on their own abilities, not only in of their chosen discipline but in terms of their relationships with others. By now, they should be conducting a high degree of self-directed study and organising their study time efficiently.
Level 3:
Learning context: / Complex and unpredictable demanding selection and application from a wide range of innovative or standard techniques using familiar and unfamiliar data.
The learner: / Has comprehensive and detailed knowledge of major discipline(s) with specialisation and depth in some areas. Without guidance, the learner is sufficiently organised to work with complex sequences of knowledge/skills towards a specified purpose: is reflective and has developed critical and evaluative skills. Can engage effectively in professional behaviour.
an interpretation: / The tutor/lecturer should now be confident that the student has all the required skills to handle new ideas and research issues found in their chosen field - and should therefore be providing it to the student. The student for their part should be able to work alone and, quickly assimilate this new information by drawing on and comparing it to earlier work in the field.

Taking a closer look at the above interpretations we can see that the curriculum is moving from one where the teaching and learning is largely dictated by the tutor (level 1) to one where learning is largely determined by the students themselves (level 3). That is to say; as you progress from level one to level three studies the responcibility for your learning rest more with you than it does with your tutors.

In my experience, students who initially resist self-directed learning reveal themselves by having an over-reliance on the lecture as the sole source of understanding in a given topic. So while they are good at attending lectures (but undertake little ancillary reading before or after the lecture), they are the ones most likely to voice their anxiety that the lecture goes too fast/slow, is too easy or, too difficult, that there are not enough handouts or that the handouts are too long/too short etc. Similarly, they will treat the seminar as a secondary lecture, which therefore does not oblige them to prepare for or participate in.

Unfortunately this over reliance on the lecture and a passive approach to learning leaves these students with no ‘fall back position’ or insurance policy against a lecture program that does not suit this particular approach to learning. As a result these students will be ‘unhappy’, perhaps even a little angry about the way the course(s) are being run and probably (if not unjustly) say so in the module evaluation questionnaires!.