Evaluations of collaborative learning in class (CLIC) in first year economics at the University of SA

In our current tertiary environment, there is increasing pressure to provide better educational outcomes for a more diverse student population, with less resources. The concerns over the ability of the conventional lecture/tutorial teaching approach to achieve desired student learning outcomes has been exacerbated by very large student numbers and demands of a rapidly changing world. The diversity of student backgrounds and awards undertaken by first year economics students, results in the need to cater for a range of learning styles and student objectives.[1]

Recent educational literature (Candy, 1994) has indicated the importance for teaching to develop students' lifelong learning skills in a world experiencing fundamental changes. Graduates are now required to problem solve in a changing environment through the ability to integrate and adapt ideas. To attain problem solving skills, students must achieve a wide range of desired learning outcomes from their studies:

• deep understanding that promotes retention of the material;
• have the ability to comprehend, apply, analyse, evaluate and synthesise concepts and models (ie achieve all educational objectives in Bloom's Taxonomy);
• critical and creative thinking skills;
• oral and written communication skills including an ability in work in groups.

This paper reports on the development and use of evaluation techniques used in the CLIC approach. In the paper, we will:

• briefly outline the CLIC approach;
• specify the qualitative and quantitative methods used to evaluate the CLIC approach;
• summarise what we have learnt so far from the evaluations in the CLIC approach - has it achieved better learning processes and outcomes than the conventional teaching approach?

The CLIC approach

Problem solving skills are better developed where students can relate to their previous experiences and real life needs with diverse opinions viewed within a small group framework. Set questions are designed to encourage a deep approach to learning. Within a safe, cooperative environment, students can construct meaning and transform understanding through vigorous interaction with the content.

Essential features of the CLIC approach are:

• classes are structured such that students attend a one hour lecture a week (200 students per lecture) and a two hour small group workshop a week, instead of the conventional two hour lecture and one hour tutorial;

• the purpose of lectures are to provide an overview only of the subject content, with an emphasis on providing students with the reasons why the content is relevant to their learning in the context of the subject (the big picture in economics) and lifelong learning (based on the why and what learning styles);

• the small group workshops consist of 30-36 students[2] where students are to discuss set questions (based on the how and what if learning styles) in voluntarily-established small groups of 6; questions are to be attempted before the class;

• workshop questions are structured to enable students to comprehend, apply, analyse, evaluate and synthesise economic concepts and models; most questions are based on real life examples that are relevant to students' experiences; questions are designed to encourage students to take a deep/generative approach to learning;

• each small group chooses a discussion leader and answer scriber for each question; scribers use A3 paper on the walls for workings and to summarise the collaborative answer of the group - specific problems in content are identified in red;

• each two hour workshop session is structured as follows:

  • facilitator/tutor preview: feedback, topic outline, suggested timetable;
  • group presentation to the whole class by a group of three students;
  • small group work on set questions, including extra exercises where possible;
  • groups fill out feedback sheets;
  • facilitator provides a contextual overview to the whole workshop class.

• ensuring a safe, cooperative learning environment to encourage all students to actively participate in relating to their own experiences;
• encouraging students to take responsibility for their learning;
• encouraging students to understand how they learn by reference to different learning styles and strategies;
• interacting individually with each group through continual movement between the small groups;
• clearing any group problems with their answers, especially those which have been identified in red in their scribed answers;
• monitoring group processes, eg group dynamics and time management;
• promoting student-centred workshop sessions through continual student feedback on their progress and consideration of their suggestions for changes.

Evaluation of the CLIC approach

Qualitative evaluation

• weekly student feedback through questionnaires from each small group - investigating the effectiveness of group processes, effectiveness of learning and suggested changes for improvement;
• regular meetings of facilitators to discuss issues regarding learning processes in class, to discuss group strategies used in class and to evaluate the monitoring of group processes;
• mid-semester questionnaire evaluation from each CLIC student specifying the pluses and minuses of the CLIC approach for learning and any suggested changes to group processes in class which would enhance their learning processes;
• use of an Epicentre to provide an on-line interactive computer survey from a sample of students from both teaching approaches, twice in the semester, to obtain specific information about the learning processes used by students in their learning of economics;
• end of semester open ended questionnaires from each student;
• end of semester interviews with each of the facilitators.

The main positive aspects highlighted by the CLIC students were that:

• a greater diversity of opinions were expressed;
• learning was student-centred and active with greater chance for participation;
• there were opportunities to reflect on economic concepts and their relationship to personal and real life experiences;
• there was more personal interaction with the teacher;
• a safer and more relaxed atmosphere existed;
• relationships with other students were more easily formed and
• a greater understanding of economics was perceived.

Staff involved in facilitating the CLIC groups all enjoyed the teaching approach and considered it provided a much better environment to enhance students' learning. The small group activities motivated the facilitators as it gave them more flexibility in the use of teaching methodologies and fostered closer relationships with the students. All staff felt they had developed their teaching skills. Many facilitators indicated that they did not enjoy tutorials as much following their exposure to the CLIC approach. Some staff had difficulties in giving students greater responsibility for their learning, with the staff members still desiring high control over the learning process. As assumed in the conventional teaching approach, they considered students would learn more if the teacher provided the student the answers in a more passive fashion.

Quantitative evaluation

• continuous assessment which included a major report undertaken in groups of three students and a group presentation; the report was designed to develop and assess students' ability to integrate economic concepts and models into the 'big picture' within a group framework;

• an exam which was in three sections:

  • section A was multiple choice to test students recognition of and basic understanding of economic concepts, ie testing low level educational objectives in Bloom's Taxonomy of knowledge and comprehension;
  • section B comprised short answer questions relating to newspaper articles to test students ability to apply economic concepts and models to real life events, ie testing deeper learning level educational objectives in Bloom's Taxonomy of application and analysis;
  • section C included essay questions which required students to reflect their understanding of how the different economic concepts and models are interrelated and integrated to give an overall economic perspective, ie assessing generative learning and higher educational objectives in Bloom's Taxonomy of synthesis and evaluation.

• average marks for the exam are higher;
• pass rates for the exam are higher;
• there is a significantly lower proportion of students with a low fail grade (F2) in the exam - it appears to help the lower quality student without disadvantaging the high scoring students;
• students do significantly better in section C of the exam - reflecting deeper learning;
• results from exam sections A and B and the report are not conclusive;
• males tend to be advantaged more by the CLIC approach whereas it is not conclusive for female students.

Conclusion

In our development of the CLIC approach, we need to further refine our qualitative and quantitative evaluation procedures, especially to aid disaggregated analysis of the student population to help identify the performances of particular types of students, eg detailed gender and ethnicity analysis.

Endnotes

1. For example, in Economic Foundations at the University of South Australia in 1995 there were about 1500 students enrolled in 1995 coming from over 30 different awards, with only about 5% of students continuing on to do an Economics degree.

2. The workshop size was determined by educational considerations (appropriate small group numbers for effective group work), room constraints and resource implications (it was found that workshop sizes of 33 resulted in slightly less teaching resources than the conventional approach - an important consideration to sell the approach to fellow staff in an environment of reducing resources).

3. Results from semester 2 1995 require further analysis and therefore have not yet been included - results from this analysis will be provided at the presentation of the paper. Also, the results from more analysis of the semester 1 results will be provided there.

References

Avenant, P (1985). Guidelines for Effective Teaching, South Africa, Butterworths.

Biggs, J (1977). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying, Melbourne, Australian Council for Educational Research.

Biggs, J and K Collis (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: the SOLO Taxonomy. New York, Academic Press.

Biggs, J (1989). Approaches to the Enhancement of Tertiary Teaching, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol 8, No 1.

Brookfield, S (1986). Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publications.

Boud, D (Ed) (1988). Developing Student Autonomy in Learning, 2nd edition, London, Kogan Page.

Candy P (1991), Self Direction for Independent Learning, Jossey Bass.

Candy, P, Crebert, G and J O'Leary (1994). Developing Lifelong Learners Through Undergraduate Education. Commissioned Report No. 28, Canberra, Dept of Employment, Education and Training, AGPS.

Entwistle, J and P Ramsden (1982). Understanding Student Learning, New York, Nichols & Co.

Feuer, D and B Geber (1988). 'Uh-Oh... Second Thoughts About Adult Learning Theory', Training, December.

Germov, J (1994). 'What to do with the Working Class? Toward a Cultural Critique of the Curriculum', Curriculum Perspectives, Vol 14, No 1, April.

Linn, R, Baker, E and S Dunbar (1991). 'Complex, Performance-based Assessment: Expectations and Validation Criteria', Educational Researcher, Vol 20, No 8, November.

McBride, G, Sharp, R, Statton, P and S Wheeler (1994). 'A Small Group Problem Solving Approach to Teaching Economics', Paper presented at the Teaching First Year Economics Conference at the University of Canberra, ISBN # 0 85889 449 1.

McBride, G, Sharp, R, Statton, P and K Wood (1995). 'Small Group Problem Teaching in Economics: A Case Study', Paper presented at the Economics Education Symposium at the University of Adelaide and included in the proceedings to the conference.

Newble, D and R Cannon (1989). A Handbook for Teachers in Universities and Colleges: A Guide to Improved Teaching Methods. London, Kogan Page.

Paterson H & Evans J (1994), 'The Application of Procreant Learning to Accounting Education: A Micro Level Approach', a draft paper for submission to Issues in Accounting Education December 1994, printed in Learning to Learn University Style: Teaching for Facilitation of Individual Learning. Heartland Staff Development Program, 1994.

Piper, D (1993). Quality Management in Universities. Canberra, Department of Education and Training, AGPS.

Watson, Vallee and Mumford (1980). Structured Experiences and Group Development. Canberra, Curriculum Development Centre.

Appendix 1

Please cite as: Statton, P., McBride, G. and Sharp, R. (1996). Evaluations of collaborative learning in class (CLIC) in first year economics at the University of SA. Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education. Proceedings HERDSA Conference 1996. Perth, Western Australia, 8-12 July. http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/statton.html