Overview
The learning activity I created stems from my personal values toward teaching critical thinking and my University’s core value of lifelong learning. Every year in August I have the opportunity to design activities to train over 100 student learning consultants throughout six peer support programs. This activity is designed as an in person, synchronous activity. It is based on the historically Texas domino game called 42. In academic context, this game aims to introduce learning as an iterative process.
Theoretical Framework
The framework for this lesson is built from two sources. The first is the pedagogy of play which posits that “within [the] paradox of play and school, educators can find meaningful learning opportunities, advancing students' academic skills as well as the social skills that will allow them to thrive in adulthood and enjoy their childhood now” (Tatter, 2019). This pedagogy is “grounded in playing toward certain learning goals [and] designing activities that fit in and leverage curricular content and goals. [Students] are trusted to direct their own learning, but with appropriate support from their teachers to meet specific goals“ (Tatter, 2019). The second source for the framework of this lesson is the philosophical issue of the nature of the knowledge worth teaching. The focus of this lesson is on critical thinking and the learning process which I believe to be essential to developing strong reasoning skills in all learners. As Seigel (et. al) ( 2018) reasons in the philosophy of education:
“ the ideals of reasoned inquiry championed by Socrates and his descendants have long informed the view that education should foster in all students, to the extent possible, the disposition to seek reasons and the ability to evaluate them cogently, and to be guided by their evaluations in matters of belief, action and judgment”.
I am using two models as the basis for learning outcomes and progression throughout this lesson. The first is the Four Stages of Competence (Gordon Training International, 1970) as seen in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
Figure 1: Visual representation of the process of learning anything new by Jennifer Hogan (2016).
Figure 2: Psychologist Noel Burch’s four-stage learning model describing the fundamental levels of learning for any adult on their journey through ignorance to skills mastery.
The second model I am using as the basis for learning outcomes and progression throughout this lesson is Fisher’s personal transition curve.
Figure 3: John Fisher’s Personal Transition curve showing the nine stages of how individuals deal with personal change.
Learning goals
The two learning goals of this lesson are to
Describe learning as an iterative process and as a lifelong learning goal
Articulate differences in learning stages
Instructions
The players or learners are grouped into small groups of 4-6 people. The trained instructor hands them a set of dominos and the domino cheat sheet for scoring. Instructions about how to play are delivered verbally as the dominos are mixed or “shaken” and selected for play. The instructor also ask the players who has played which of the following card games:
Spades
Hearts
Poker
Blackjack
Cribbage
Euchre
The instructor is looking for past experience for:
Understanding trump cards or suites
making bids in partner based games
Understanding scoring systems and goals
The players are asked to play one round to completion however they are not allowed to ask for clarification from the instructors. After one round, players are asked for feedback about the playability of the game and their ability to learn the game. The players have the opportunity to ask questions of the instructors and receive the instruction Booklet. The players are then asked to play a second round. The feedback questions are repeated.
The second part of this activity is to tie the game of 42 to the Four Stages of Competence and Fisher’s personal transition curve. Questions are posited to the learners:
When you first started playing 42, where did you begin with the Four Stages of Competence?
Did having prior knowledge about games help or hinder you?
What other skills that you have learned in the past can you apply these models to?
What future skills can you think of where this knowledge might be useful?
Could you identify the learning stage of another learner in the subject area you work in?
These instructions are repeated for scaling up from the trainers to the larger group of student employees.
Technologies
Technology is optional in this activity depending on the instructors preferences. The instructions can be presented through projection from a computer, sent to student’s personal devices for individual use, or printed. The learning models can be similarly delivered.
Assessment
The lesson I designed aims to educate students to understand learning as an iterative process regardless of the topic or skill. At the end of this lesson the learner should be able to indicate that they better understand learning as an educational process (rather than instruction or indoctrination) and that they understand the learning process as “change [. . . involving] the acquisition of knowledge and intellectual skills and the development of understanding” and that they now are “committed to [teaching] the domains of knowledge and skill into which he or she has been initiated” (Siegel, 2018).
The training includes general feedback questions about the diverse sessions they attend. One of the questions in the survey directly asks the learners to rate the value of the training activities as related to helping them do their job.
Student Feedback:
“I really enjoyed playing 42 and learning about the steps to gain unconscious knowledge of a subject”
“Trying to figure out how to play 42, because we had to come together to learn how to properly play.”
Figure 3: Student Leaders during a leader training session in 2016.
Additional Resources:
If you don’t have a Dave Baca: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbCq0au_W_0
Game play: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dS3y9kQXoY
References
Hogan, Jennifer. (2016). When teachers don’t know what they don’t know. The
Compelled Educator. http://www.thecompellededucator.com/2016/04/when-teachers-dont-know-what-they-dont.html
Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R. W., & Fisher, W. A. (1978). A behavioral process approach to
information acquisition in nondurable purchasing. Journal of marketing research, 15(4), 532-544.
Siegel, H., Phillips, D.C., & Callan, E. (2018). Philosophy of Education. Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Center for the Study of Language and Information. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/education-philosophy/
Tatter, G. (2019). Playing to Learn | Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Comments