Functional adventures in the deep end: The evolution of a pragmatic 48-month undergraduate curriculum By C. Harold McManus, Ph.D. ? 2010 Excerpt 7/10

Platforms can facilitate a hybrid nomothetic/idiographic approach

 Education is like a double-edged sword. It may be turned to dangerous uses if it is not properly handled.  Wu Ting-Fang (The Quotations Page, 2008).

I am always amazed when I read a college brochure or check out a university’s web page and see how they go on and on about how many computer labs they have on campus. While I find wireless networks and Pentium processors to be impressive (this was published in 2010. At least I did not say the IBM PC AT), I do not believe that having a port by every pillow in a residence hall speaks to issues of technology usage and knowledge development on a given campus. Computer technology, like the higher education system it supports, can be a double-edged sword, depending on how it is used. Computers and information technology in academia are tools and tools that need the proper platform in order to reach their full potential.

The etymology of the word “platform” can be traced back to 1535 from the French word plate-forme, indicating a diagram, a map, literally a flat form. In the context of this report, the term is used to describe “a vehicle … used for a particular activity or purpose or to carry a usually specified kind of equipment” (Webster’s Online Dictionary, 2008). In this framework, we classify information/knowledge as a piece of equipment that can move and transform people (Vygotsky, 1960). In order to maximize the effectiveness of a web-enhanced approach, and to build a bridge between nomothetic and idiographic ideologies, we recommend a tiered platform approach to educating undergraduate students. The basic premise of this platform approach is best illustrated by methods used in the automotive industry.

There are a significant number of people riding around stating that they would not be caught dead driving a pickup truck while all the time they are riding in the middle of one. As Table 2 illustrates, people driving a Ford Explorer, Expedition or Excursion are basically driving a modified pickup truck. For all the commotion that surrounded the introduction of the retro-looking PT Cruiser many years ago, it is and was, at its core, simply a Dodge Neon.

Table 2. Vehicle Platforms

This idea of building upon a platform is not unique to American car builders. Toyota has its Sequoia, which is built around the Tundra platform, and for years, the only passport that the Honda Motor Company had into this hybrid SUV truck market was built on an Isuzu platform. Platforms are popular in the automotive world because they are cost-effective. Similar parts, engines, and other components keep the cost down when it comes to building and maintaining vehicles. 

In order to facilitate the development of most students and to build a bridge between high and low performing students, a tiered platform approach can be a game-changer. 

The approach that we developed is based on 1500, 2500, 3500, and 4500 numbering scheme that parallels the undergraduate classification system. For the purpose of this illustration, we will be referring to the capabilities of a basic LMS platform such as Moodle or Blackboard.  The logic will apply equally well to various versions of LMS products.  We are proposing a network platform design (McManus, 2002) that combines the power of an LMS and the science of IBL into a developmentally-aware information/knowledge creation system (See Table 3).

Table 3. Network Platform Analogy

Very often, success or failure for the typical undergraduate student is primarily a consequence of preparation, environment, and motivation.  Positive student learning outcomes are often found somewhere in the balance between preparation and motivation. Clark Hull (1952) discussed the concepts of drive and motivation from a physiological perspective. In this view, the individual’s behavior is motivated by a need to reduce a need state and maintain a balanced state called homeostasis (Davis & Palladino, 2004). Mazur (2002) stated that learning, as a rule, is most effective and rapid when the student is motivated and attentive. Behavioral studies have demonstrated that one good way to maintain a student’s motivation is to deliver strong and immediate reinforcers for correct responses. This is especially true of first-year students. 

At the P-1500 Level (see Table 3), the focus of the teacher-student interaction is information exchange. The course delivery system is used primarily for communication and to provide students with strong and immediate reinforcement for the proper level of engagement. The P-1500 level is, for the most part, a teacher-directed enterprise where facts and ideas are introduced, developed, and applied. The foundation for subsequent platforms is developed during this stage. First-year students are, for the most part, driven by three extrinsic motivators—grades, grades, and grades. Creativity, on the other hand, is driven by intrinsic motivation (Amabile, 1996; Amabile, 1983; Crutchfield, 1962; Golann, 1962). In the next level, (P-2500), students are ready to move towards controlled independence. 

In addition to course-level discussion boards, each individual student group must now have an assigned discussion board to plan and develop collaborative group projects. By starting a discussion topic (called a thread), the instructor can track the reasoning skills of students as they work toward a solution. This private shared space allows students who understand the complex subject matter to help those who are having difficulty. This virtual Zone of Proximal Development will increase the learning experience for all involved. [In your grade book, there must be line items for "credit" awarded to group facilitators. You will find that these high performing students are already equipped for the task and will remain engaged if they can actively lead group activities. It is a win-win-win]

Web sites from all over the world should be integrated into the course through the use of external links developing copious content for this monitored inquiry function. In essence, students are exposed to inquiry and the professor can monitor and guide them through the process. The classroom is still primarily a teacher-facilitated environment at this level (see Table 4), but some of the tasks (process) of gathering necessary information (content) begin to shift from instructor to student and student groups. Then, by the third year (P-3500), the benefits of the shared classroom will be evident and full exposure to both IBL and web-enhanced knowledge creation is possible in a Zone of Proximal Development.    

Next time—Step-by-Step instructions for developing this “platform shoe approach” in your course this fall. We will once again include syllabi examples and start describing rubrics that you may find useful. Only three installments left. 

Summary

1.    In order to maximize the effectiveness of a Web-enhanced approach and to build a bridge between the nomothetic and idiographic ideologies, we recommend a tiered platform approach to educating undergraduate students.

2.    Very often, success or failure in the typical undergraduate is primarily a function of motivation. Success or failure is often a function of establishing homeostasis (Davis & Palladino, 2004). 

3.    Mazur (2002) stated that learning, as a rule, is most effective and rapid when the student is motivated and attentive. Behavioral studies have demonstrated that one good way to maintain a student’s motivation is to deliver strong and immediate feedback.   

4.    First-year students are, for the most part, driven by extrinsic motivators such as grades and may not be interested in learning for the sake of learning. 

5.    A move towards an idiographic and asynchronous approach represents a major shift in the educational paradigm, and an LMS facilitates the move.

6.    Students who understand core concepts can improve their understanding by hosting asynchronous Web-based support sessions.   

7.    This student-centered hosting approach adheres to the Vygotskian idea of learning as a co-construction of knowledge within student-centered activities.

  References

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer.

Crutchfield, R. (1962). Conformity and creative thinking. In H. Gruber, G. Terrell, & M.

Werthimer (Eds.) Contemporary approaches to creative thinking (pp. 120-140).

New York: Atherton Press.

Davis, S. F. & Palladino, J. J. (2004). Psychology, 4th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: 

Prentice Hall.

Golann, S. E. (1962). The creativity motive. Journal of Personality, 30, 588-600.

Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior System. New York: Appleton.

McManus, C. H. (2002, November). Using Inquiry-Based-Learning in a web-enhanced

environment: Asynchronous learning networks can level the playing field. Proceeding of the 2002 Sloan-C International Conference on Asynchronous Learning Networks, Orlando, Florida.

Mazur, J. E. (2002). Learning and Motivation in education. Microsoft? Encarta?

Reference Library 2002. ? 1993-2001 Microsoft Corporation.

The Quotations Page (2008).  Wu Ting-Fang.

https://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Wu_Ting-Fang/ Accessed Friday, August 15, 2008.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1960). Development of higher psychical functions. Moscow: APN.