L2L Evaluation
Contents |
Learning to Learn Evaluation
We offer the following resources to schools working with Hooked on Thinking to integrate a common language of learning who wish to assess and report on the integration of HOT Learning to learn programmes and HOT Maps and rubrics and other thinking skills and strategies across a school.
Media type="custom" key="5250623"
Media type="custom" key="5102249"
Learning to Learn Strategic Plan
File:HOT Maps L2L Strategic Plan Rubric.pdf
Capturing a "before we started" snapshot
Survey your teachers and students to find out what they think or understand by "learning". For example collect written, visual or verbal responses to the following questions.
What is learning? How do you know you are doing it? How can you tell if it is going well? How do you know what to do next?
This baseline data will be useful to show change after you introduce learning interventions that target different learning outcomes (aka thinking skills and strategies that help students achieve different learning outcomes). Refer http://www.slideshare.net/Artichoke/solo-taxonomy-and-thinking-skills
In our work we use SOLO Taxonomy as a model of learning outcomes - http://www.slideshare.net/Artichoke/hot-maps-and-solo-taxonomy and the thinking skills are used to target different and specific learning outcomes in SOLO.
Developing Survey Questions
Then play around with the questions from the Zimmerman research paper into metacognition - thinking about thinking.
Refer: Development of a Structured Interview for Assessing Student Use of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies. Barry J. Zimmerman and Manuel Martinez Pons. American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Winter, 1986), pp. 614-628. Published by: American Educational Research Association
Use the first set of questions and tweak contexts to fit with the learning needs and interests of your of students. These questions from Zimmerman et al are thoughtful because they sample all the parts of using thinking tools that are important - not just the "what do you use?" stuff. An example of what you might develop is available in the HOT Metacognitive Tools Survey below
File:HOT Metacognitive Tools Survey Questions.pdf
Whatever you do, you want to avoid survey questions that simply ask participants to just list WHAT THEY CLAIM TO USE/ TO KNOW ABOUT - Instead try to capture baseline stuff on WHAT they have used AND WHY they have used it - WHAT LEARNING OUTCOME it was useful for - HOW OFTEN they use it - and some measure of HOW FLEXIBLY they use thinking tools
Baseline Questions (Halsey Drive School
Media type="custom" key="9925181"
Assessing Learning to Learn Interventions
Approaches that might suit are provided below.
File:HOT Map Curriculum Use Survey.pdf
File:HOT Map Implementation Survey.pdf
File:HOT Guskey PL Assessment.pdf
File:HOT Map TASR Survey Student.pdf
File:HOT Map TASR Survey Teacher.pdf
File:HOT Map TASR use Survey.pdf
File:HOT Maps ReflectiveSurvey.pdf
File:HOT Correlating student teacher assessment.pdf
Self assessing use of Thinking Skills
Another approach is to list the thinking skill or strategy and ask the students and teachers to self assess their use against SOLO outcomes framed as tacit, aware, strategic and reflective - see below - it is possible to select thinking strategies you have identified as powerful or simply ask them to identify their own
File:HOT Teacher and Student Thinking Skills and Strategies Self.pdf
| Self-Assessment: Teacher and Student Use of Thinking Skills and Strategies Learning Outcomes based on the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO Taxonomy Biggs and Collis 1982), Swartz and Perkins and Gordon Training Institute. | |||||
| Biggs and Collis 1982 |
Prestructural LO |
Unistructural LO |
Multistructural LO |
Relational LO |
Extended Abstract LO |
| Learning outcomes show unconnected information, no organisation. E.g. “I can use [X] thinking skills/strategy if I have help or direction” |
Learning outcomes show simple connections but importance not noted. E.g. “I can have a tilt at using [X] thinking skill/strategy” |
Learning outcomes show connections are made, but significance to overall meaning is missing. E.g. I use [X] thinking skill/strategy on a trial and error basis to get a learning outcome” |
Learning outcomes show full connections made, and synthesis of parts to the overall meaning E.g. “I plan to use [X] thinking skill/strategy because it will help get a [Y] learning outcome” |
Learning outcomes go beyond subject and makes links to other concepts – generalises E.g. “I just sense that using [X] thinking skill/strategy is best to get a [Y] learning outcome” | |
| Swartz and Perkins |
Tacit |
Aware |
Strategic |
Reflective | |
| Gordon Training Institute |
unconscious incompetence or unconscious unskilled |
conscious incompetence or conscious unskilled |
conscious competence or conscious skilled |
unconscious competence or unconscious skilled | |
| THINKING SKILL |
[Tick the box below that best indicates your level of understanding of the thinking skill or strategy listed] | ||||
| [Insert your own] |
|
|
|
|
|
| de Bono Six Hats |
|
|
|
|
|
| PMI |
|
|
|
|
|
| Brainstorming |
|
|
|
|
|
| See Think Wonder |
|
|
|
|
|
| HOT Describe Map |
|
|
|
|
|
| HOT Generalise Map |
|
|
|
|
|
| Alphabet Key |
|
|
|
|
|
| Think Pair Share |
|
|
|
| |
File:HOT Maps ICT Audit Template Edendale.doc
.jpg)
