Applying the alignment model of sustaining student motivation and active learning in a multi-cultural context.
Abstract
Central to the theory and practice of teaching and learning is the search for alignment between course aims and objectives, content, structure, delivery, assessment methods and outcomes sought. The research reported in this paper was based on two broad assumptions. The first is that without alignment it is unlikely that directed teaching and learning will occur. The second is that more attention must be paid to student motivation. This paper reports an attempt to improve correlation between one particular third year business unit and the motivation of the students concerned. This largely qualitative research found that while there was an element of connection, alignment and student motivation did not necessarily always go together.Downloads
References
Anderson, LW, Krathwohl, DR, Airasian, PW, Cruikshank, KA, Mayer, RE & Pintrich, PR 2001, A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing, Longman, New York.
Biggs, J 1989, ‘Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 7-25.
Biggs, JB 1999a, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press, Buckingham, England.
Biggs, J 1999b, ‘What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 57-75.
Biggs JB 2002, Aligning teaching and assessment to curriculum objectives, LTSN Imaginative Curriculum, viewed 1 March 2011 <http://www.palatine.ac.uk/files/1023.pdf>.
Biggs, J 2003, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, The Society for Research in Higher Education/Open University Press, New York.
Biggs, J & Collis, K 1982, Evaluating the Quality of Learning: the SOLO taxonomy, Academic Press, New York.
Biggs, J & Tang, C 2007, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 3rd edn, Open University Press, New York.
Bloom, BS, Engelhart, MD, Furst, EJ, Hill, WH & Krathwohl, DR (eds) 1956, Taxonomy of educational objective. The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1. Cognitive domain, McKay, New York.
Blumberg, P 2009, ‘Maximizing Learning Through Course Alignment and Experience with Different Types of Knowledge’, Innovation in Higher Education, vol. 34, pp. 93-103.
Bonwell, C & Eison, J 1991, Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom, AEHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Jossey-Bass, Washington, D.C.
Coleman, B & McNeese, M 1996, ‘From Home to School: The Relationship Among Parental Involvement, Student Motivation, and Academic Achievement’, The International Journal of Learning, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 459-470.
Cowan, J. and Harding, A, 1986, ‘A logical model for curriculum development’, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 2, no. 17, pp. 103-109.
Deci, E & Ryan, R 1985, Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour, Plenum Press, New York.
Gardner, H 1999, The Disciplined Mind. What All Students Should Understand, Simon and Schuster, New York.
Hegarty, N 2010, ‘Application of the Academic Motivation Scale to Graduate School Students’, The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 48-55.
Jones, B., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. 1994, Designing Learning and Technology for Educational Reform, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, Oak Brook, IL.
Kember, D, Ho, A & Hong, C, 2008, ‘The importance of establishing relevance in motivating student learning’, Active Learning in Higher Education, vol.9, no. 3, pp. 249-263.
Morgan, G 2006, Images of Organization, (updated edn), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Nicolettou, A 2009, 5 Stages of Educational Design, LTS503 Curriculum, Swinburne University, Melbourne.
Pintrich, P & Schunk, D 2002, Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Applications, 2nd edn, Merrill Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River.
Saljo, R 1981, Learning approach and outcome: Some empirical observations, Instructional Science, vol. 10, no. 1, pp 47-65.
Silberman, ML 1990, Active Training: A Handbook of Techniques, Designs, Case Examples, and Tips, Lexington Books, New York.
Sullivan, W & Rosin, M 2008, A New Agenda for Higher Education: Shaping a Life of the Mind for Practice, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Trigwell, K, Prosser, M & Waterhouse, F 1999, ‘Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning’, Higher Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 57-70.
Tuysuz, M, Yildiran, D, & Demirci, N 2010, ‘What is the motivation difference between university students and high school students?’ Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, vol. 2, pp. 1543-1548.
Twigg, CA 2003, ‘Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: Lessons learned from Round 1 of the Pew Grant Program in Course Redesign’, Educause Review, viewed 1 March 2011 <http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf>.
Vallerand, R, Pelletier, L, Blais, M, Briere, N, Senecal, C & Vallieres, E 1992, ‘The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education’, Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 52, pp. 1003-1017.