How Learning Plans Assist in Knowledge Building

Kat Lui, Ph.D.

Associate Professor

Communications, Education, & Training Department

UW-Stout

Back to Scholarship of Teaching: 2003-04 Participants and Their Projects

PROJECT SUMMARY:

In April, 2003 a request for proposals was forwarded to faculty members from the Teaching and Learning Center at UW-Stout. Instructors were asked to identify an ≥intriguing problem≤, a new class project, or an assignment that might address the issue. Bill Cerbin (2004) suggests that students create knowledge by using what they already know to make sense of new information. This project was funded to investigate preconceived notions about the concept of training. Students from two sections of Training Systems in Business and Industry (TRHRD 360/560) participated in this project. Learning Plans were utilized in an effort to have students identify their objectives, strengths, and competencies relative to training systems. Malcom Knowles (1986) posits that the most single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach accordingly. Learning Plans are one way of discovering what the student already knows and what they hope to acquire. They are based upon a self-directed learning premise indicating when adults learn on their own initiative they learn more deeply and permanently. This project spanned the spring semester of 2004. Students revised their Plans, discarded objectives that no longer held meaning, developed additional objectives pertinent to their interests and used the mid-semester coaching as an opportunity to discuss interest in related professions.

The primary research question was ≥How do learning plans assist in knowledge building?≤.

COURSE CONTEXT:

The key learning goal of this course is to develop an understanding of how training systems enhance employee development and productivity thus increasing organizational effectiveness. This course is an elective for several majors including Hospitality and Tourism, Service Management, General Business Administration, Telecommunication Systems, and Graphic Communication Management. Consequently students from a variety of majors take this course. Training Systems in Business and Industry is a 300 / 500 level course. The typical student profile is male, 20 years old, sophomore or junior level. Often there may be 1-2 graduate students taking this course as a pre-requisite for their degree program.

KEY LEARNING ACTIVITY:

I was curious how the use of learning plans might uncover what knowledge students have regarding intellectual goals of this course.

The Learning Plan document contained the following requirements:

a) Describe and list 7 of your learning objectives for this course

b) List and describe your strengths as they pertain the goals of this course

c) List and describe competencies you need to develop

d) All courses have a level of importance to each of us, using a scale of 1-5 with 1 signifying that this course is highly important, please rate the importance of this course to you.

e) What is the grade you seek?

f) What will you do to work towards this grade?

The data collection process was as follows:

Step 1: Orient learners to the process of self-directed learning through group activities and individual coaching

Step 2: Negotiate Learning Plan ≠ learners prepare first draft, review, provide reactions

Step 3: Provide support, monitor progress

Mid-Semester - 1:1 coaching

End of Semester ≠ Reflection

KEY FINDINGS:

Early semester reflection

Students

• identified strengths (training) via course objectives and review of available course content (PPT, Text Outline & Glossary)
• listed competencies needed to develop relative to training systems
• developed objectives pertaining to Training Systems

Mid-Semester coaching

Students

• revised Learning Plans
• discarded objectives that no longer hold meaning
• developed additional objectives pertinent to their interests
• used coaching as opportunity to discuss interest in field (i.e. internship investigation)

End of semester reflection

Students were asked to review their Plans and address these questions:

• Describe how your objectives were satisfied this semester.

The majority of students felt their objectives were met during the class. Comments such as ≥I feel that Iπve become more in touch with how training people works. I now understand the problems associated with training. I feel that if I have people under me I will now be able to better access their learning strengths and weaknesses. This will allow me to implement a training plan much more suited to the individuals needs. Before when I thought of training I always focused on the objective of the training not the peopleä≤

• How were your strengths enhanced?

Comments such as: ≥My strengths were enhanced because I learned the tricks of the trade from doing the Proposal. It gave me a real life example to applyä≤ Another student commented ≥My strengths were actively used throughout the class, especially for the presentation project. I was able to actively use my computer skills while attempting to put our groups thoughts into something visually appealing in a clear, concise format.≤

• How were your competencies developed?

Some students expressed the interest for more ≥real world≤ practice in order to fully address their competencies. However others felt ≥group work≤ was motivating stating they wished all classes were like this.

• Would you still rate this course similarly? Is so, why? If not, why not?

Most said they would apply the same or an improved rating.

LINGERING QUESTIONS:

How do college students embody the assumptions of andragogy?

What additional activities can I design and facilitate to ascertain learnersπ knowledge of training systems?

Poster to accompany this report

Back to Scholarship of Teaching: 2003-04 Participants and Their Projects