Black's October Monthly Summary

Laura commented on Group One and Group Three's October summaries

October Summary

This month has gone so quickly! We spent numerous hours continuing our research of multiple case studies revolving around the environment and context of real life. The beginning of the month we finalized our program investigation and found many relevant programs to gather information from and apply to our “real-life” examples.

Shortly after our program investigation, we continued our weekly discussions on the information processing model, how the brain is wired, multiple intelligences theory, mental processes of cognition, and Piaget’s cognitive stages of development.

Between our weekly discussions and comments, we found the time to work on our syllabus design. As a group, we were really proud of final product. (Personally, I would sign up for our “real-life” workshop; I loved the format and content that we created.) We could see how our program investigation was the framework for our syllabus design. It has been rewarding to see how our group efforts have come together to create a program that could be used in the real world with many applications that adult learners could benefit from.

As a group, we came closer during the middle of the month as we were assigning different parts to complete for our syllabus design paper. We made a group pact to finish a few days early and give ourselves time to proofread and finalize. Unfortunately, when push came to shove, we didn’t meet our personal timeline, but still managed to complete the paper and submit it before the class deadline expired. Go team!

We are looking forward to bringing it all together with our project demonstration next month! 

October Monthly Summary

Neary commented on Group 3 & Group 4 Monthly Summary Blogs.
October Monthly Summary

The month of October has flown by! I actually had to look at my planner to see what all specifically has been accomplished in this month! It seems like just yesterday I was writing my September monthly summary!

The month started off with our Program Investigation being due our team (Group 2: Environment & Context) worked together for the first time. Everything and everyone worked well together. I was very pleased at how well things worked out between all three of us being graduate students with different day-to-day schedules. Each of us brought a different view to the table and helped provide our team with multiple perspectives on environment and context in adult learning. This month focus shifted to assignments and less emphasis was on the reading materials, books, videos, etc. Even though we still had some reading, it was nice to take what we have been learning this semester and apply it.

Also due this month was the Syllabus Design. This was definitely one of the most challenging things I have done in my graduate studies because I have no experience in creating any syllabus, lesson plan, or anything of that sort. It was difficult to start, but I used the required reading materials from this course and they provided a very good foundation and suggestions. Our team ended up designing a syllabus for a seminar for facilitators using ‘real life’ environment in the classroom. After completing the seminar syllabus- I saw how much I have learned from this class. The skills I have learned would not have been acquired if I had not taken a course outside of my program. I am very excited to continue on with the class and see what the month of November brings!

Group Two Syllabus Design

Black commented on Group 4 & Group 6-Syllabus Design

Neary Commented on Group 4 & Group 5 - Syllabus Design. 

Syllabus Design- Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the classroom to the boardroom

Laura A. Black

McCall Aldrich

Katelyn Neary

Ball State University

Syllabus Design- Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the classroom to the boardroom

Interpretation of Rationale

This syllabus design is for a business training program for a group of facilitators (instructors, professors, teachers) working at different universities across the state of Indiana. The contents of the course and the syllabus will focus on how facilitators can create a pleasant learning environment for students so they will learn business more efficiently. There are five dimensions of environment and context including the physical, cultural, knowledge, power and real-life environments; furthermore, for this syllabus design focus is on the ‘real life’ environment. 

Based on programs that were researched, this syllabus will incorporate ideas and concepts for each program. The concepts will assist the facilitators in providing a ‘real-life’ learning experience for each student to assist in a powerful learning experience. Each seminar attendee will gain personal experience from the learning process and knowledge in how to guide and better prepare students for this ‘real-life’ context incorporation.

A syllabus has been designed to capture all of the extraordinary features identified by programs previously investigated and the literature that has been reviewed. The seminar, Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the Classroom to the Boardroom, has been designed to recognize the importance that environment and context can have on adult learning. This seminar is a training program that highlights these external factors.

Programs

Three programs were investigated to overcome the limitations identified by the literature review. The first program, “PricewaterhouseCoopers Experimental Case Study” used an undergraduate course to complete a systems analysis project replicable to one industry professional’s use. The second program, “Simulation-based Learning” Just like the Real Thing” helped medical students and other health professionals’ develop knowledge, skills, attitudes, and teamwork to enhance performance on the job. The third program, “Learning from Others: Learning in a Social Context” takes examples of different facilitators in how their teaching was affected by social interactions in different settings; furthermore, this program provides facts on how these social interactions among students can enhance the learning environment in a ‘real-life’ setting.

The seminar held will use realistic scenarios incorporating the previous mentioned programs to allow for those attending to get ‘real-life’ experience that will enhance business skills. Retraining and practicing sessions will take place till one can master the procedure or skill being taught. Teamwork training conducted in the simulated environment may offer an additive benefit to the traditional didactic instruction, enhance performance, and possibly also help increase learning effectiveness.

Features integrated into syllabus & seminar design

Many great features were identified by the programs investigated that were considered in the creation of the course syllabus as well as use of ‘real life’ environment.

Features from “PricewaterhouseCoopers Experimental Case Study” provide great ideas that should be implemented into a syllabus. The first feature of this program that will be intergraded is the facilitator’s encouragement for students to treat the case as ‘real work’ rather than a class assignment; furthermore, students were told to act as PwC system and process assurance consultants. The second feature that will be integrated into the syllabus design involves the emphasis on skills developed from the case and how applicable they are to a variety of contexts and firms. Stressing the importance of the skills acquired from the ‘real life’ case study approach and how beneficial it is for an person in a working environment, not just as an employee of whatever industry topic is being used for the case. The third feature applicable to our syllabus design is the discussion of nuances not portrayed in the classroom, but may arise in the ‘real world’.

Features from “Simulation-based learning: Just like the Real Thing” provides simulation-based training techniques, tools, and strategies that can be applied in designing structured learning experiences, as well as be used as a measurement tool linked to targeted teamwork competencies and learning objectives. The first feature of this program that will be integrated is to encourage critical thinking to resolve dilemmas. This will allow participants of this seminar to use critical thinking to narrow options and assess situations to gain results. The second feature of this program that will be integrated into the syllabus design will allow time and tools for retraining and practice until a skill or procedure is mastered. This will give participants the tools needed to successfully complete a task once they return to their place of work. The third feature applied will be building communication skills through collaborative group work.  This will give participants the opportunity to build trust and rapport with co-workers, use active listening to know when “not to step on each other’s toes,” to clearly define roles and responsibilities, as well as communicate awareness of common goals.

Features from “Learning From Others: Learning in a Social Context” provide guided social interactions to increase the learning sophistication in each student’s situation. The first feature that will be incorporated in this syllabus design for training program will be; guided discussions in the classroom. Students will have opportunities to voice their knowledge of business and their personal experiences with the assistance of the Facilitator. The Facilitator will lead discussions in in a professional setting, guiding meaning discussions on business topics and incorporating ‘real-life’ scenarios to get each student thinking and learning from one another as-well-as learning from the educated instructor. The second feature that will be incorporated from this program in the training is small group work. There will be opportunity for each person attending this training to be assigned in a small group and learn to work through a business problem or situation with this group. The social interactions in this group will facilitate a meaning learning experience. The third feature to be incorporated in the syllabus design for this learning program is the ‘reciprocal teaching’ that is taught in the ‘Learning in a Social Context.’ Each group will be assigned to work through a business situation together, then groups will present their material teaching the others in this training the information they came up with. This experience will provide each person with greater understanding of the material and gain experience in different social settings.  

The programs investigated provide excellent features from which our group can build an effective program. Attention of the physical, cultural, knowledge, power, and real-life environment will be given while constructing our program. The program will try to create a learning environment conducive to as many individuals and learning styles as possible while using a ‘real life’ environment approach.

There are also ideas from the reviewed literature that will be implemented in the syllabus design in relation to learning and facilitating principles. According to Mackeracher (2004), “the brain requires that learning activities be carried out in a physically supportive environment in which the learner is reasonably comfortable, the temperature and lighting are suitable, and the air quality is good. (p. 102)

For the seminar, creating a physically supportive environment is a main focus as it should be for any facilitator. Providing a good example for the seminar attendees will allow facilitators to see experience the difference and hopefully try to recreate it when they are back in the classroom for their students. The seminar will be held in a large conference room with the tables initially set up in a term known as a ‘Cluster’ (Lawson, 2009, p.157). This allows for the trainer to allow for moderate group involvement during the presentations and discussions of the case studies. The ‘cluster’ table set up also allows for two-way communication compared to most conference table settings.

These features previously mentioned from the investigations’ and literature will serve as a basis for the design of the proposed syllabus. There are five main features that will be implemented:

1. Instructors highlight benefits and possible barriers of using case study in class room setting.

2. Strategies learned can be applied to design additional learning experiences.

3. Students should act more as researchers compared to traditional students.

Implementation

To implement these features into the design of a syllabus, modifications are needed to maximize the effectiveness of the features within the syllabus. The first feature will be advocated in the syllabus by the reading material and learning tools, which emphasize encouragement from facilitators to treat the case as ‘real work’ rather than another assignment and putting an emphasis on the numerous industries that are applicable to the case; therefore, while also discussing the differences between ‘real world’ and classroom problems. The syllabus will include activities to reiterate the second feature by highlighting the professional skills acquired from the use of a ‘real-life’ or case study. The third feature will be reinstated in the syllabus by encouraging social interactions in several different settings such as giving students more responsibility in the classroom; furthermore, for example allowing them to check email in class and encourage communication to be that of a business professional.

Conclusions

In the creation of Learning & Teaching Effectively, the physical, cultural, power, knowledge, and ‘real life’ environments were all considered and addressed in the integration and application of the seminar. By designing a seminar and syllabus that is based on using real life environments it will hopefully create more effective learning and teaching practices. 

Seminar Outline

Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the Classroom to the Boardroom

Seminar Outline

Seminar Website: www.classroom2boardroom.com

Session Meetings:

Saturday, January 25th, 2014 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM

                        Sunday, January 26th, 2014, 8 AM to 4 PM

                        Saturday, February 1st, 2014, 8 AM to 4 PM

                        Sunday, February 2nd, 2014, 8 AM to 4 PM

Location:        Indiana Convention Center, Room 101

100 S. Capitol Indianapolis, IN

Instructor: Dr. Ball State

Instructor Contact Information:

bstate@bsu.edu

Cell phone: 317-333-3333

Office phone: 317-555-5555

Seminar Objectives

1. To learn the benefits and possible barriers of using a case study in a classroom setting.

2. To learn strategies that can be applied to design additional learning experiences.

3. To acknowledge the importance of treating students as a professional and not as a traditional student.

4. To identify and apply social interactions as support for future learning and teaching experiences.

5. To become familiar with teaching in groups and the benefits of learning role contexts.

Skill level requirements for seminar attendees:

Professor or instructor at a university headquartered and located in Indiana;

Interest and/or experience in using ‘real life’ case study;

At least 5 years’ experience as an instructor or facilitator at particular university.

**Note the special requirements for attendance. Contact bstate@bsu.edu for further questions in relation to the skill level requirements.

Seminar Format

The seminar will include multiple forms of instruction and evaluation including individual, small, and large group work. Instructional methods will include lecture presentations, pre-session questionnaires, assigned reading materials, discussion, case study evaluations, videos, expert speaker presentations, testimonials, and question and answer sessions. For convenience and understanding handouts, worksheets, and notes will be available online and at each seminar meeting. Nametags will be provided at each seminar meeting check-in to try to help familiarize the attendees with one another. Nametags will include: First and Last name, University, Area of study, years in the position. It is expected that attendees arrive with time to check-in, collect name tags and any session documents, and are ready for participation.

Attendance: Attendees are allowed up to a quarter day of absence from the seminar or 2.25 hours over the course of the four seminar meetings. There will be no make-up opportunities available. If attendance cannot be achieved due to any circumstance including emergency- withdrawal from the conference should be considered. The stringent attendance policies required of the seminar is based on the certification that is awarded after completion of the 4 seminar meetings. Successful completion will be judged based on attendance, completion of pre-questionnaire, reading material with assignments, and participation. We ask all participants to clear their schedules in advance, so limited interruptions and complete participation is achieved. Any questions or concerns in relation to the attendance policy and withdrawal procedure, contact Dr. Ball State, bstate@bsu.edu.

Certification: Upon successful completion of the seminar and assigned materials a conference certification will be issued to each successful attendee. The certificate will instate the successful completion of the “Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the Classroom to the Boardroom” seminar and the skills acquired and topics discussed. See Exhibit #4 for the Learning & teaching effectively: From the classroom to the boardroom certificate.

Accommodations: If any attendee needs any adaptations or accommodations because of a disability or any other reason, please contact bstate@bsu.edu in advance to allow for appropriate procedures as well as notification of the Indiana Convention Center personnel.

The Indiana Convention Center allows guests to walk from Lucas Oil Stadium to twelve premium hotels including the Westin, Hyatt, Marriott, Conrad, Omni, Crowne Plaza at Union Station, Embassy Suites, and JW Marriott. There are over 7,100 + hotel rooms within blocks of the Indiana Convention Center. The seminar has a special premium package deal with The Westin Indianapolis Hotel. The address of The Westin is 50. S Capitol Ave Indianapolis, IN 46204, phone contact: (317) 262-8100. The Indiana Convention Center is connected via an enclosed walkway to The Westin Indianapolis Hotel. For a special seminar package pricing use the promotion code: Classroom to boardroom.

There is no obligation for seminar attendees to stay at The Westin Indianapolis Hotel; furthermore, there are an abundant number of hotels located closely to the Indiana Convention Center, if The Westin is not of preference. There are 108 rooms within 1 block of the Convention Center and the skywalk connects to 4,715 hotel rooms. 1-1.5 miles from Convention Center there are 379 rooms available, with so many different rooms available in a close proximity to the seminar the decision to hold the conference at the convention center was made (Indiana Convention Center, n.d.).

Parking

Downtown Indianapolis hosts more than 70,000 parking spaces. An interactive map is available with pricing, hours, and more at Indianapolis Downtown Inc. and parking reservations can be made at Parking Whiz. Go to http://www.indydt.com/interactivemap.cfm?&lm=vd for more information about parking and reservations.

Internet Accessibility

Free Wi-Fi is available in the Convention Center for tasks that are not bandwidth intensive such as reading email and light internet browsing. Clients that require higher needs can contact Smart City Networks. The seminar committee has taken care of this and seminar attendees are encouraged to bring personal lap tops or operating systems.

Assignments

A pre-assessment questionnaire (Exhibit #2) will be distributed to each seminar attendee via email and United States postal mail service approximately 3-4 weeks prior to the first seminar meeting. If it is past December 16th, and no email or hard copy has been distributed to the attendee, please contact bstate@bsu.edu immediately. The purpose of the questionnaire is to provide the facilitator of this program with insights into your current skills or knowledge about the subject of using ‘real life’ environment in the classroom. By knowing what new skills and knowledge you would like from the program, the facilitator will be better able to meet your needs.

Specific reading material is assigned and is available on the seminar webpage (www.classroom2boardroom.com). Requests for additional hard copies should be made to bstate@bsu.edu in advance with understanding of U.S. postal mailing delivery methods. Each reading material requires the completion of an assignment, the document is standard for all three reading assignments and can be found on the webpage and under Exhibit #3 Not only are the assignments due at the start of the conference, but each attendee should be prepared for a discussion and evaluation over reading material.

Reading & Assignment # 1: From the Journal of Innovative Education, “A systems analysis experiential case study: Repeatable real-world problem solving.” Reading and assignment #1 due:  Saturday, January 25th, 8 AM

Reading & Assignment #2: From the Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock: the article titled, “Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing.” Reading and assignment #2 due: Sunday, January 26th, 8 AM

Reading & Assignment #3: From the research article titled, “Learning from others: Learning in a social context.” Reading and assignment #3 due: Saturday, February 1st, 8 AM.

The morning each reading and assignment is due, dedication will be given at the seminar for each assignment, starting with a small group discussion (at each individual table), followed by a total group discussion- moderated by Dr. Ball State.

Seminar Meetings and Schedule of events

Learning & Teaching Effectively: From the Classroom to the Boardroom

Saturday, January 25th, 2014

8:00- 8:30 AM Registration/Check in

8:30-9:00 AM Welcome/Opening Comments/Ice Breaker

9:00-9:30 AM Evaluate pre-session questionnaires responses, discussion

9:30-9:45 AM Break/Snacks Provided

9:45-10:30 AM Discussion on case study (reading assignment #1) A Systems Analysis Experiential Case Study: Repeatable real-world problem solving

10:30-11:00 AM Break into groups – evaluate case

11:00-11:15 AM Total group discussion

11:15-11:45 AM Video on real-life experience case study

11:45 AM-12:00 PM Questions/comments on seminar so far

12:00-1:15 PM Break for lunch, lunch tickets provided in welcome packet

1:15-1:30 PM- Return from lunch

1:30-2:30 PM- Presentation/ Q&A: Dr. Priscilla Arling, Professor at Butler University, author of Case Study: A Systems Analysis Experiential Case Study: Repeatable real-world problem solving

2:30-3:00 PM Meet and Greet with Dr. Arling

3:30 PM Explanation of future readings & meetings, Questions

4:00 PM Dismissal

Sunday, January 26th, 2014

8:00- 8:30 AM Registration/Check in

8:30-9:00 AM Welcome/Opening Comments/Ice Breaker

9:00-9:30 AM Introduction & Discussion about yesterday’s meeting

9:30-9:45 AM Break/Snacks Provided

9:45-10:30 AM Discussion on case study (reading assignment #2) From the Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock; “Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing.”

10:30-11:00 AM Break into groups – evaluate case

11:00-11:15 AM Total group discussion

11:15-11:45 AM Video on real-life experience case study

11:45 AM-12:00 PM Questions/comments on seminar so far

12:00-1:15 PM Break for lunch, lunch tickets provided in welcome packet

1:15-1:30 PM- Return from lunch

1:30-2:30 PM- Presentation/ Q&A: Dr. Ball State, Experience and work with ‘real life’ case studies

2:30 PM Explanation of future readings & meetings, Questions

3:00 PM Dismissal

Saturday, February 1st, 2014-

8:00- 8:30 AM Registration/Check in

8:30-9:00 AM Welcome/Opening Comments/Ice Breaker

9:00-9:30 AM Evaluate previous seminar meetings

9:30-9:45 AM Break/Snacks Provided

9:45-10:30 AM Discussion on case study (reading assignment #3) “Learning from others: Learning in a social context.”

10:30-11:00 AM Break into groups – evaluate case

11:00-11:15 AM Total group discussion

11:15-11:45 AM Video on real-life experience case study

11:45 AM-12:00 PM Questions/comments on seminar so far

12:00-1:15 PM Break for lunch, lunch tickets provided in welcome packet

1:15-1:30 PM- Return from lunch

1:30-2:30 PM- Presentation/ Q&A: Dr. May, Professor with over 20 years of case study experience

2:30-3:00 PM Meet and Greet with Dr. May

3:30 PM Explanation of future readings & meetings, Questions

4:00 PM Dismissal

Sunday, February 2nd, 2014

8:00- 8:30 AM Registration/Check in

8:30-9:00 AM Welcome/Opening Comments/Ice Breaker

9:00-9:30 AM Evaluation of previous seminar meetings

9:30-9:45 AM Break/Snacks Provided

9:45-10:30 AM Discussion on seminar and objectives achieved

10:30-11:00 AM Break into groups – evaluate seminar

11:00-11:15 AM Total group discussion

11:15-12:00 PM Questions/comments on seminar so far

12:00-1:15 PM Break for lunch, lunch tickets provided in welcome packet

1:15-1:30 PM- Return from lunch

1:30-3:00PM- Presentation of Certificate of Completion

3:30 PM- Farwell & Dismissal

REFERENCES

Arling, P.A., Deeter. C., & Eggers, H. (2010). A system analysis experiential case study: Repeatable real-world problem solving. Journal of Innovative Education, 8 (2), 417-422.

Hammond, D., Austin K., Orcutt S., Martin, D.(nd). Session 7 Learning from others: Learning in a Social Context, 125-142.

Indiana Convention Center (ICC). (n.d.). In Indiana Convention Center and Lucas Oil Stadium online. Retrieved from http://www.icclos.com/about.aspx.

Lateef, F. (2009). Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing. Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock, 3(4), 348-352.

Lawson, K. (2009). The Trainer’s handbook (3rd Updated ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Wiley Press.

MacKeracher, D. M. (2004). Making sense of adult learning (2^nd ed.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT 1

Participant Cover Letter

Dear Program Participant:

Welcome to the Learning & teaching effectively: From the classroom to the boardroom workshop! I am looking forward to meeting and working with you as we explore ways to enhance and create pleasant learning and ‘real life’ environments to improve teaching and learning.

In preparation for this session, I am asking you to complete the following pre-session assignments:

1) Confidential Pre-session Questionnaire. Please fax your completed questionnaire to me by January 17th. My fax number is 317-666-6666.

2) Assignment & Reading Material #1: Please bring your completed assignment with any questions or comments to the session on January 25th.

It is imperative that you complete these pre-session assignments. We do not want to take valuable seminar time to complete this work. It should take you about one hour to complete both assignments.

This seminar will be highly interactive, and you will have several opportunities to apply concepts and skills to ‘real life’ scenarios.

See you on Saturday, January 25th, 2014!

Sincerely,

Dr. Ball State, Ph.D.

Program Facilitator

EXHIBIT 2

Confidential Pre-Session Questionnaire

The purpose of this questionnaire is to provide the facilitator of this program with insights into your current skills in or knowledge about the subject of using ‘real life’ environment in the classroom. By knowing what skills and knowledge you would like from the program the facilitator will be better able to meet your needs.

Name:_____________________                    Current Position:________________________

University:_________________                    City, State:_____________________________

Previous experience with real life environment:

Previous positions held:

Formal education beyond high school:

What course, workshops, or seminars have you attended related to the topic?

Briefly describe the responsibilities of your current position:

How long have you facilitated others?

How many students are in your program?

What do you believe is the most difficult problem or challenge you face when trying to translate ‘real life’ to students?

What one specific thing do you want to get out of this program?

What concerns do you have about participating in this learning experience?

Additional comments:

Please Fax this to Dr. Ball State at (317) 666-6666 no later than January 17th, 2014.

Any questions please email bstate@bsu.edu.

EXHIBIT 3

Seminar Assignments

Instructions: Read the following articles, which can be found at www.classroom2boardroom.com, and answer the following questions for each reading assignment (numbers one through three). These questions will guide your small group discussions at the start of each seminar.

Reading & Assignment # 1: From the Journal of Innovative Education, “A systems analysis experiential case study: Repeatable real-world problem solving.” Reading and assignment #1 due:  Saturday, January 25th, 8 AM

Reading & Assignment #2: From the Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock: the article titled, “Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing.” Reading and assignment #2 due: Sunday, January 26th, 8 AM

Reading & Assignment #3: From the research article titled, “Learning from others: Learning in a social context.” Reading and assignment #3 due: Saturday, February 1st, 8 AM.

 

EXHIBIT 4

 Certificate of Completion

Syllabus Design Team Contributions:

McCall Aldrich: Program description, description & features of program

Laura Black: Program description, description & features of program, Exhibit 3- Seminar assignments and questions, Exhibit 4- Certificate of Completion

Katelyn Neary: Program description, description & features of program, Seminar Outline, Exhibit 1- Participant Cover Letter, Exhibit 2- Pre-session Questionnaire. 

Program Investigation

Neary commented on Group 3 and Group 4 Program Investigations. 

Program Investigation- Environment and Context: ‘Real Life’ Environment

Katelyn R. Neary

McCall Aldrich

Laura A. Black

Ball State University

Program Investigation- Environment and Context: ‘Real Life’ Environment

Introduction

The environment and context have a profound impact on learners and five aspects have been identified from an analysis of the literature as the main contributors to environment including: the physical, the cultural, the power, the knowledge, and the ‘real life’ environment (MacKeracher, 2004). Each of these components is a major contributor to learning specifically adult learners; furthermore, the goal should be to develop an atmosphere in which adult learners feel both safe and challenged, with learners encouraged to become active participants in the teaching/learning process, with some degree of mutual involvement in the determination of instructional objectives (Biswalo, 2001). Using ‘real cases’ for workplace problem solving in the classroom can provide many benefits to both the instructor and participant; furthermore, by filling the student ‘learning gap’ between the abstract conceptualization and reflection of the university and the practical experience and experiment evident in industry (Hodge, Wright, Barraket, Scott, Melville, & Richardson, 2011). Kolb’s model of learning includes situated learning theories and how they can be used to emphasize the contextual or situated nature of learning as a result of co-participation among others within communities of practice (Hodge et al., 2011). After a review of the literature, various reliable and noteworthy scholars have identified that using ‘real life’ environment scenarios is a proven method to help learners. A program investigation was performed to examine programs that have used ‘real life’ environments for learners. The influence of ‘real life’ environment and the impact on the learners can be seen in the three programs we chose to investigate. In the first program, “PricewaterhouseCoopers Experiential Case Study,” significant emphasis is placed on using practical experience from industry professionals in the classroom to enhance the context of the course. In the second program, ‘Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing’ provides learners in an environment with scenarios involving ‘patients’ that are used to help individuals learn in the medical field. The third program investigated, ‘Learning from others: Learning in a social context’ concentrates on teacher’s importance and how their use of social interactions within an environment can have a large impact on what individuals learn from one another. The purpose of this investigation was to identify various programs use of ‘real life’ environment content with learners; therefore, to configure the most effective and efficient way to apply these key features into our program design.

PricewaterhouseCoopers Experiential Case Study

            To overcome the problems identified by the literature review, the experiential case study approach can be used; therefore, PricewaterhouseCoopers developed a systems analysis project based on an experiential case study approach. Using an experiential case study approach combined the benefits of working with a written case explanation and materials, with the benefits of interacting with business people who share their real world experiences and their real world expectations. The case study was created by James Willis of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Chicago Practice. The case study involved a fictional company called Spuds, and was designed originally to train PwC practitioners on systems implementation assurance methodology. To add an experiential component, this case study included interaction with PwC staff throughout the semester.

            The Spuds case study was used with students in a single semester undergraduate systems analysis course. The audience of students included a broad range of disciplines including business majors, business minors, and information system minors. These students were looking to increase their understanding of information systems and project implementation. Students did not need any programming or project management knowledge upon starting this course and case study. The only prerequisite was an Information Technology (IT) course that covered MSExcel and MCAccess.

            The learning objectives of the course stated were to educate students in the tools, techniques and skills required to conduct a successful information system analysis project. In this course students were expected to:

·       Develop an understanding of the impact of information systems on organizations and how those information systems are developed. By the end of the course students will be able to:

·       Explain the basic concepts and terminology associated information systems

·       Analyze and design specifications for information systems and communicate the solution to stakeholders

·       Understand the balance needed between people, processes, and technology in order to implement a successful management information system.

·       Discuss the importance of communication in organizations and cite examples of good and bad communication.

·       Understand the role of project management in the successful implementation of an information system

·       Discuss the role of non-IT department staff in the development of an information system

·       Explain current techniques for modeling logical systems

·       Acquire the ability to identify business problems, make decisions regarding the problem and document how those problems can be addressed with an information system.  To accomplish this, students will:

·       Interview business contacts with a “real world” business problem and produce a preliminary needs report

·       Conduct a fact finding investigation where business requirements are discovered and documented

·       Analyze and document the potential risks associated with an on-going information systems project

·       Model the business problem with current modeling techniques

·       Produce status reports as well as preliminary and final reports for presentation to management, in accordance with established processes and standards.

To realize the goals –mentioned above- the Spuds case description and deliverables were modified to be suitable for an undergraduate systems analysis class. Spuds, Inc. is a salty snack food company that is in the process of implementing an information system to improve its delivery and inventory management. Systems analysis case studies typically place students at the very start of a project, when the analysis is first requested. The Spuds case however assumed that an information systems development project had already begun. The students’ assignment was to analyze the current state of the project and assess areas at risk for preventing a successful project completion. The format of the case offered the benefit of presenting students with mistakes that are often made in IT projects. Students were asked to use their knowledge of systems analysis and project management, compare that knowledge to what had occurred in the case, and to propose remediation to management. In addition, students were expected to create reports in a standard format, which were based on templates used by PwC systems and process assurance group. Each student created a first draft of each deliverable, which was commented on by the instructor. For the final draft of each report, students created a single team version which was commented on by both the instructor and the PwC staff.

The semester was 14 weeks long and the 75-minute class met twice a week. Students were put into teams of 4. Although students are in teams of four, each student produced their own draft and final version of the preliminary report. This allowed the instructor to evaluate and provide individual feedback on each students writing and ideas.

The PwC staff provided two presentations, Participated in role-playing, attended student presentations, commented on final draft of each report, and provided feedback. The PwC Staff spent a total of 6 hours in the classroom and 20 hours outside of the classroom preparing for class and providing feedback on the written and oral deliverables. The staff also spoke about their work experiences and engaged students in discussions about systems analysis issues. The staff helped to bring the case to life by role playing as key informants such as the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Students interviewed the informants in order to better understand the facts of the case. Again, PwC staff highlighted real-world issues, as the informants at time contradicted each other, presented new and sometimes unrealistic goals for the project, or were minimally interested in participation to show students a realistic work atmosphere when dealing with executives. In the final week of the course, the PwC staff attended student presentations and provided feedback.

Main Features of PricewaterhouseCoopers Experiential Case Study

            Many great features were identified from the PricewaterhouseCoopers experiential case study that will be very beneficial in our creation of a course syllabus using a ‘real life’ environment.

            One feature would involve encouraging students to treat the case as ‘real work’ rather than a class assignment is another main feature of this program. In the spuds case the students were told they were acting as PwC system and process assurance consultants. Doing this will hopefully change students attitude and approach when considering this course; furthermore, students should be that of a business professional communicating with colleagues. Participation from the PwC staff will create a different environment compared to having the instructor implement the case study as an assignment. In the research report, it stated that numerous students from the course went on to complete internships with PwC and even full term employment. This program case study showed that partnering with a local firm can be mutually beneficial for the students and company

            Another feature would be to provide an emphasis on the skills developed from the case and that they can be applied in a variety of contexts and firms. Noting that the lessons learned from the case are not just applicable for a PwC employee, but overall the skills acquired from working in groups and using ‘real life’ experiential case study approach can be beneficial to any industry. This is a key feature because no matter what the identified topic a learning tool is not most effective or efficient when only be related to improving skills in one industry. As we are aware from the literature review, student’s in particular adult students are more receptive when there is a known need for learning. In this program, the students were paired in groups of four, which provided four different perspectives in relation to the case study experience. Experience can have impact on the types of learning strategies that are employed in the adult education classroom. Individual learner’s experiences may enhance instruction as learners participate in group and peer-helping activities (Finn, 2011). Students will be more inclined to participate if they feel they are going to get something out of the case and explaining this feature is important.

            Discussing the nuances of real-world business problems is another important feature. Problems that take place in a classroom vary from those in the real-world. It is important to use several class periods to work in small groups for students to get a better understanding of how working with others can create problems. Using these small groups will allow students to develop critical thinking skills. In the report it mentioned to not fill every class session will all new content; furthermore, giving students time to absorb the content and discuss in groups is a great alternative to lecture. Having the PwC staff present and using their personal experiences to educate the students helped highlight real life scenarios; therefore, role-playing allowed the students to practice implementing the newly acquired information from the case in with the PwC staff and instructor.

Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing

The second program investigated, “Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing,” focuses on using “real life” environments and scenarios to help learners in the medical field. Although simulation can be used in many different disciplines, this study focuses on medical education where creating a “real-life” environment provides a valuable tool in learning to resolve practical dilemmas. The learners in this study were specifically health professionals who required the skills necessary to master the knowledge and procedural skills of patient care. Simulation, or “real-life” environment, is a technique used to replace and amplify real experiences with guided and immersive ones.

Learners of this study were various health care teams comprised of doctors from various disciplines, nurses, physiotherapists, radiologists and radiographers, pharmacists, medical students, and other personnel. The context of this learning is to set up an opportunity and “real-life” environment for medical learners to gain clinical experience, develop skills in procedures that require eye-hand coordination, deal with unanticipated medical events, and increase confidence.

The basis of the program was to create a simulated clinical environment such as an intensive care unit, emergency room cubicle, or operating room that is prepared with equipment and a crash cart. The setup is as realistic as the actual facility. Additionally, human patient simulators are used to create “real-life” situations. These “patients” can blink, breath, have heart beats, and make respiratory sounds as well as “interact” with learners through computer guided teaching programs. Attached monitors can display vital signs and provide virtual simulation of almost every major bodily function. These “patients” can be used for scenarios from simple examinations to major trauma management.

The goal of simulated-based learning is to allow new learners the opportunity to perform high-risk procedures, resuscitation, and implement critical decision-making skills in real time. Simulation provides a learning model to ensure the new learners have exposure to emergency or uncommon events without risk to human patients. According to Woolliscroft, who wrote, Harvey: The impact of a cardiovascular teaching simulator on student skill acquisition, learners using simulation-based learning perform twice as well as learners who did not participate in simulated learning. 

 The educators of this program are seasoned doctors and senior staff who already have a good grasp on the scenarios. They can assess student performance through checklists of activities, actions, relevant human factors, roleplaying, and even videotaping. The learning process is designed to be hands-on to simulate a “real-life” situation in an emergency room or medical situation. This type of learning environment is based on the idea that learners learn best “by the activity, context, and culture in which it is developed and used” (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989).  In other words, being immersed in a situation is the best way to learn a new concept. By promoting collaborative activities among peers, providing coaches and mentors who observe learners as they carry out tasks, and provide opportunities for new initiatives and self-directed problem solving, adults are learning from experience and will be able to apply this new knowledge to their daily responsibilities and tasks.

In this simulation, the learning objectives were to ensure that learners could resolve practical dilemmas, master procedural skills, and build communication skills with a medical team. These objectives required learners to:

v Resolve practical dilemmas

§  Critical thinking needed to narrow options

§  Assess situation to gain results

§  Practice open dialogue with patient and/or family

§  Flexible enough to adapt to any new situation

§  Role play in high stress scenarios

v Master procedural skills

§  Learn and master skills for ambidextrous maneuvers (ex: bronchoscopy and other endoscopic procedures)

§  blood pressure (systolic/ diastolic) and all vital signs

§  insert IV and draw blood (zenipuncture)

§  use of surgical instruments

§  CPR (cardio pulmonary resuscitation)

v Build communication skills

§  Building trust and rapport with medical team

§  Active listening to know when “not to step on each other’s toes”

§  Define roles and responsibilities

§  Communicate awareness of common goals

Simulation-based learning, in any context, allows learners to apply knowledge and use critical thinking skills. Learning in a “real-life” environment is beneficial because it adds to traditional instruction, enhances performance, and reduces possible future errors. Additionally, simulated learning improves communication skills, provides direct feedback from facilitator, and encourages team work.

Learning from Others: Learning in a Social Context

The third program investigated, ‘Learning from Others: Learning in a Social Context’, how teachers can incorporate learning style connected with a social setting is addressed. We are constantly in social interactions, and learning from them. Whether the learning is formal or informal, interactions from birth help us sharpen our growth and comprehension of the world. An insightful example from this program suggests that, “Even as we sit reading a novel by ourselves, we interact with the author” (Hammond, D., Austin K., Orcutt S., & Martin, D). More of these social interactions are discussed throughout this paper. Included are a few of the learning objectives discussed in this program are:

·       Assisted performance and the “zone of proximal development” – teachers will understand how they can identify students’ level of proficiency and readiness for a given task and target assistance accordingly.

·       Strategies for fostering communication – teachers will understand the importance of language communication, and interaction in learning. Teachers will consider several specific teaching strategies to foster and guide communication in the classroom, including the role of questioning, group work, managed discourse, and reciprocal teaching.

·       Social contexts and learning communities – teachers will recognize that when students work collaboratively to assist one another and take on expert roles, their learning is strengthened, reinforced, and refined. Teachers will consider strategies they can use to build learning communities.

There are interactions that can have a lasting and memorable effect on people. For instance, the interactions between parent and child will have a lasting impression for how the child sees life and situations. Lev Vygotsky (1978) discusses interactions between children and teachers where they received support on learning. Knowledge comes from interactions we have with others. Language can help children become strategic; therefore, a teacher can be essential by assisting in the language and leading social interaction to help children develop and become more skilled. This enhances the learning process. Other contemporary theorists support this idea that learning is a social process and have built on the idea.

Practical suggestions for creating a real life environment:

1.     Having teachers and students produce work together

2.     Develop language and literacy across the curriculum

3.     Making meaning: Connecting school to students lives

4.     Teaching complex thinking

5.     Teaching through guided conversation

Roland Tharp expands on ideas of social interaction being essential to meaning learning. Tharp and is colleagues have an “Instructional Conversation”. An excerpt from this explains the outcome of what it means to converse. “To Truly teach one must converse; to truly converse is to teach” (Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R., 2000).

There are several strategies to encourage this interaction in the classroom. One way to do this is to have structured discussions with meaning questions and responding to each of the students. Interacting with students and guiding the interactions and discussion in small groups or large groups. Having guided discussions can help students to graduate from their way of thinking on a subject to a more focused and studied opinion. The teacher becomes an assistant in the social process of learning. The teacher helps students move forward to higher levels of difficulty.

An example of the writing process an illustration of how a teacher adjusts her instruction to the needs of the student:

            The Student with beginning writing skills might benefit from a question such as ‘Is there something important that this sentence needs at the beginning?’ Or he might benefit from straightforward information much as ‘This sentence says ‘ran home’ but I could understand it better if it told who or what ‘ran home.’ As skills develop, the adult models increasingly sophisticated questions and problem solving (Oakes & Lipton, 1999) (Hammond, et al.).

Application of key features in the future

Provide guided discussion in the classroom

            The PricewaterhouseCoopers experiential case study provided numerous features that could be applicable for use in the future. Instructors can help maximize the learning experience for the participants of a case study by applying these key features. Instructors should relate the benefits and possible barriers of using a case study approach. Students should be encouraged to treat the case to be that of ‘real work’ rather than a standard homework assignment. The instructor can address this feature by creating more of a professional atmosphere in the classroom by using common workplace procedures versus classroom procedures. The student’s attitude and behavior should be that found in a professional environment; therefore, students should treat each other, the instructor and business representatives should be one of a business professional communicating with colleagues. For example, an instructor could allow students to use electronic devices while in the classroom that were previously prohibited. Students could then be encouraged to check email and keep in contact with the ‘client’ in this case PricewaterhouseCoopers. Upon completion of the case study, the instructor should emphasize the numerous skills acquired from using this method of learning; furthermore, the vast number of contexts and firms that these acquired skills could be applied to is universal. When using the PricewaterhouseCoopers case, it would be important to remind the participants that PwC is not the only company that uses standard business processes. A discussion of nuances that potentially exist in the ‘real world’ but are being withheld in this scenario because of the classroom environment should happen at the start of the case study. This will inform students of variances when doing this in a classroom setting compared to the ‘real world’, but identifying them early will help minimize their presence. For example, the full access students have to instructors (decision maker) is not representative to that of an executive (decision maker) in a professional setting.

Advocate Social Interaction in groups

Working in groups can teach students to understand others points of views. It teaches students to learn how to communicate well with others, including listening and speaking up when they need to. Group work can be challenging because several different opinions can enter in the group. This is part of the real life environment that is important to the learning process. All of us will be involved in a group setting at one point, whether it is at work, church, family or community events that we are involved it. It is a maturing process to understand how to work effectively in a group and learn how to fulfill your role within the group.

This does not mean that every single class discussion needs to turn into a group project to teach the students. There are studies that should cooperative learning can enhance reasoning, solutions and new ideas (Hammond 2013).  The following is an example given from this paper on how an elementary school teacher helped his students develop social skills for collaboration. First the students worked in short simple activities in teams of two. This helped the students focus on working together instead of working on a difficult problem. After several simple tasks were given, a more difficult problem was assigned to each group. This time allowed for the students to know how to successfully communicate and work together. They understood what each of their strengths was in the group. Eventually the group’s responsibility was increased, in turn increasing learning experiences (Oakes & Lipton, 1999).

Reciprocal Teaching

Reciprocal teaching is where the teacher assists in aiding the students to gain knowledge through teaching one another. This term is helpful because it helps students to gain responsibility, and also gain knowledge by teaching the information to others. This article suggests that there are four areas that are touched on from this teaching method. Reciprocal teaching encourages the student to; question, clarify, summarize and predict.

The teacher is there to summarize on main ideas and offer insightful questions to main ideas (Hammond, et al.). When the students begin to feel more comfortable with teaching and also with the material they begin to offer insightful summaries and questions.

In my undergraduate degree I took an Interior Design Codes class. This is a course where all the building and design regulation codes are taught. We learned what to look for when choose certain materials if designing a commercial grade fabric due to fire codes etc. There are a lot of codes, and even codes vary from city to city. Therefore, this class was full of a lot of memorizing and a lot of material. My instructor used Reciprocal Teaching as a way to help us getting involved in the material and memorize it. We were assigned into groups. (Also helping with our social interaction skills) Then within each of our groups we had to cover 10 questions for each chapter at a time. The next class period we would each turn in our questions from the group. The teacher would gather them and ask the class. We would answer them as our morning quiz. The rest of class we would discuss all of the questions in detail and take turns teaching one another about each code. After learning about reciprocal teaching I felt this was the perfect way to teach such a class. This was a way to make it interactive and interesting when it could have been straight memorizing and lectures.

Students act as researchers

Hammond refers to the idea student’s act as researchers. The student is responsible for taking a subject into their own responsibility and researching to bring it to light in a larger aspect. Students are expected to plan and incorporate an academic learning activity into their research and present it. This subject goes hand in hand with reciprocal teaching, except it emphasizes individually in studying the subject more fully. Work is brought through labor and repeated cycles of research. Students emerge as experts in a subject from internet research and exploring other resources outside of assigned text.

CONCLUSION

            The programs investigated provide excellent features from which our group can build an effective program. Attention of the physical, cultural, knowledge, power, and real-life environment will be given while constructing our program. The program will try to create a learning environment conducive to as many individuals and learning styles as possible while using a ‘real life’ environment approach.

Table 1.The main features relating to environment and context, with the adaptable features

	PwC Experiential Case Study	Simulation Based Learning	Learning From Others
Feature 1	Encourage treatment of case to be ‘real work’	Encourage critical thinking to resolve dilemmas	Advocate social interaction in groups
Feature 2	Emphasis on numerous industries of application	Allow for retraining and practice until a skill or procedure is mastered	Provide guided discussion in classroom
Feature 3	Discussion of nuances not portrayed in classroom	Build communication skills through collaborative group work	Support students to teach each other
Adaptable Features	Instructors highlight benefits and possible barriers of using method	Strategies learned can be applied to design additional learning experiences	Students act as researchers

References

Arling, P.A., Deeter. C., & Eggers, H. (2010). A system analysis experiential case study: Repeatable real-world problem solving. Journal of Innovative Education, 8 (2), 417-422.

Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of

 learning. Educational Researcher,18(1), 32-42.

Biswalo, P. (2001). The systems approach as a catalyst for creating an effective learning environment. International Council for Adult Education, 34 (1).

Finn, D. (2011). Principles of adult learning: An esl context. Journal of Adult Education, 40 (1), 34-39.

Hammond, D., Austin K., Orcutt S., Martin, D.(nd). Session 7 Learning From Others: Learning  in a Social Context, 125-142.

Hodge, P., Wright, S., Barraket, J., Scott, M., Melville, R., & Richardson, S. (2011). Revisiting ‘how we learn’ in academia: Practice-based learning exchanges in three Australian universities. Studies of Higher Education, 36 (2), 167-183.

Lateef, F. (2009). Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing. Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock, 3(4), 348-352.

MacKeracher, D. M. (2004). Making sense of adult learning (2^nd ed.). [b1] Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (1999). Teaching to change the world. Boston: McGraw- Hill College.

Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life; Teaching, learning, and schooling in a social context. Cambridge, Eng. & New York: Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Woolliscroft, J. (1987). Harvey: The impact of a cardiovascular teaching simulator on student skill acquisition. Med Teach, 9, 53-57.

Program Investigation Team member contributions:

Katelyn Neary: Researched and wrote about PricewaterhouseCoopers Experiential Case Study, as well as co-wrote the introduction and conclusion, created Table 1.

Laura Black: Researched and wrote about Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing, as well as co-wrote introduction, and conclusion.

McCall Aldrich: Researched and wrote about Learning from others: Learning in a social context, as well as co-wrote introduction and conclusion.

---