Wednesday, March 15, 2017
A hat for each occassion
When designing for effective blended learning to enable 21st century learning, it helps to approach such a task by creating a constructive alignment table. According to Biggs, this simply means that our choice of learning outcomes, pedagogic or T&L approach and assessment must be aligned. See an example below:
(Kennedy, 2017. Clarity in the curriculum: Using Constructive Alignment to improve your module)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thula, Thanks for the reminder on how we should re-design our curricula for 21st century Education.
ReplyDeleteLet me share a "little story" on my experience in my current position.
educational background. This gab was identified when the Centre for Open and Lifelong Learning recruited some of these SMEs as course developers. Our institution then designed a post graduate certificate to augment their expertise so they can “teach with conviction and a sense of priority”.
Our institution's response is justified by Biggs, et al. (2011) as they state that if institutions implement, support and wish to enhance constructive alignment, inevitably issues of quality assurance and quality enhancement are raised. Therefore “these measures should be founded in the … teaching and learning, staff development, continuing formative evaluation and policies and procedures for recognizing quality teaching and learning as an institutional priority. This way [lecturers’] conception will change and they are more likely to [lecture] with conviction and sense of priority”.
More about Constructive Alignment ...
ReplyDeleteAll the advantages of Constructive alignment we discussed during our ID workshop is very well articulated in:
Teaching Anatomy: A Practical Guide by Khan and Pawlina (2015)
1. Students are able to focus more effectively on the key learning goals
2. Fairer and more reliable assessment
3. Improved learning outcomes, including critical thinking and depth of students work
4. Greater transparency leading to easier and more accurate interuniversity and international comparisons
5. Greater coherence in programs and more effective evaluation of modules and courses