Introduction
Course design plays a critical role in shaping the learning experience and outcomes for university students (Biggs & Tang, 2011). To enhance course design, academics can incorporate pedagogical strategies that support deep understanding, self-regulated learning, and continuous improvement. This paper highlights three such strategies: Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and continuous feedback mechanisms. These approaches aim to improve students’ understanding of course content, foster critical thinking, and promote self-assessment and reflection.
Learning Journals
Theoretical Framework
Learning Journals serve as a platform for students to reflect on their learning experiences, identify areas of improvement, and track their progress throughout the course (Moon, 2006). These journals align with constructivist learning theory, which emphasizes the importance of students actively constructing knowledge and making sense of their experiences (Piaget, 1950). By encouraging reflection and self-assessment, Learning Journals help students develop metacognitive awareness and self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2002).
Empirical Evidence
Learning Journals serve as a platform for students to reflect on their learning experiences, identify areas of improvement, and track their progress throughout the course (Moon, 2006). These journals align with constructivist learning theory, which emphasizes the importance of students actively constructing knowledge and making sense of their experiences (Piaget, 1950). By encouraging reflection and self-assessment, Learning Journals help students develop metacognitive awareness and self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2002).
Implementation
To implement Learning Journals, instructors can provide students with guiding questions or prompts that encourage reflection on their learning experiences. These prompts can include questions about the course content, personal learning strategies, or challenges faced during the learning process. Instructors should also schedule regular check-ins with students to review their journal entries and provide feedback on their reflections.
Scaffolded Assessments
Theoretical Framework
Scaffolded Assessments involve breaking down complex tasks into smaller, manageable steps that build upon each other, providing support and guidance as students progress (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). This approach is grounded in Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) theory, which posits that learning occurs most effectively when tasks are slightly above a learner’s current level of competence, with support provided by a more knowledgeable individual (Vygotsky, 1978).
Empirical Evidence
A wealth of research supports the use of Scaffolded Assessments in promoting deeper understanding and skill development. For example, a meta-analysis conducted by Belland et al. (2015) found that scaffolding significantly improved student learning outcomes, particularly in complex problem-solving tasks. Additionally, a study by Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) found that students who participated in scaffolded activities demonstrated better understanding of course material compared to their peers who did not receive scaffolding.
Implementation
To implement Scaffolded Assessments, instructors should break complex tasks into smaller, manageable steps that build upon each other. These steps can be presented as a series of formative assessments, which provide students with feedback on their progress and identify areas for improvement (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Instructors can also provide support materials, such as guiding questions, templates, or examples, to help students navigate the steps. To foster a sense of autonomy and self-regulation, instructors can gradually reduce the level of support as students become more proficient in the task.
Continuous Feedback Mechanisms
Theoretical Framework
Continuous feedback mechanisms involve providing students with ongoing, timely, and specific feedback on their understanding of course content (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Formative assessments, peer feedback, and instructor feedback all contribute to continuous feedback. The feedback-focused approach is grounded in the social constructivist theory, which emphasizes the importance of interaction and communication in the learning process (Vygotsky, 1978). Research has shown that continuous feedback can improve student learning outcomes and enhance motivation (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
Empirical Evidence
Numerous studies demonstrate the effectiveness of continuous feedback mechanisms in improving student learning outcomes. For example, a meta-analysis by Hattie and Timperley (2007) revealed that feedback had a strong effect on student achievement. Similarly, a study by Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) found that formative assessment and continuous feedback contributed to the development of self-assessment and self-regulation skills.
Implementation
To incorporate continuous feedback mechanisms into their courses, instructors can use a variety of strategies, including formative assessments, peer feedback, and regular check-ins. Formative assessments can take the form of quizzes, written reflections, or in-class activities, which help identify areas of misunderstanding and provide opportunities for revision. Peer feedback can be facilitated through structured activities, such as peer review of assignments or group discussions. Regular check-ins with students can help identify areas of confusion and provide tailored feedback on their progress.
Integrating Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and Continuous Feedback Mechanisms in Course Design
To optimize the benefits of Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and continuous feedback mechanisms, instructors should consider integrating these strategies into a cohesive course design. This can be achieved by:
- Aligning course objectives and assessment tasks with the desired learning outcomes (Biggs & Tang, 2011)
- Providing clear expectations and guidelines for students regarding the use of Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and feedback processes (Moon, 2006; Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007)
- Scheduling regular check-ins and feedback sessions to ensure timely and ongoing support for students (Hattie & Timperley, 2007)
Conclusion
Incorporating Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and continuous feedback mechanisms into university course designs can significantly improve the learner experience. By employing these strategies, academics can support deep understanding, promote self-regulated learning, and foster critical thinking among their students. As universities strive to enhance student learning and engagement, the adoption of these evidence-based approaches has the potential to transform educational experiences at the university level.
Case StudY
To provide a deeper understanding of how Learning Journals, Scaffolded Assessments, and continuous feedback mechanisms can be implemented in university courses, this section presents case studies and practical examples.
Case Study 1: Learning Journals in a Psychology Course
In a university psychology course, the instructor introduces Learning Journals as a way for students to reflect on their understanding of course material and their personal learning strategies. Students are required to submit weekly journal entries responding to prompts such as:
Describe a concept from this week’s lecture that you found particularly interesting or challenging. How does it relate to your prior knowledge or experiences?
Reflect on your study habits this week. What strategies did you employ, and how effective were they in helping you learn the material?
The instructor reviews the journals periodically and provides individualized feedback, encouraging students to apply their reflections to their ongoing learning.
Case Study 2: Scaffolded Assessments in a History Course
In a university history course, the instructor implements Scaffolded Assessments for a final research paper. The instructor breaks down the research paper into smaller, manageable steps:
Topic selection and preliminary research
Annotated bibliography
Thesis statement and outline
First draft
Final draft
Each step is accompanied by clear guidelines, resources, and deadlines. The instructor provides feedback at each stage, allowing students to refine their work and develop their research skills progressively. This approach helps students manage the complex task of writing a research paper, and it supports their gradual development of critical thinking and writing skills.
Case Study 3: Continuous Feedback Mechanisms in a Biology Course
In a university biology course, the instructor incorporates continuous feedback mechanisms to help students monitor their understanding of the course material. The instructor uses a variety of strategies, including:
In-class quizzes: Students complete short quizzes at the beginning of each lecture to assess their understanding of the previous lecture’s material. The instructor reviews the quiz results and addresses common misconceptions during the lecture.
Peer feedback: During laboratory sessions, students work in small groups and provide feedback on each other’s experimental procedures, data analysis, and conclusions. The instructor provides guidelines and a rubric to facilitate constructive peer feedback.
Instructor feedback: The instructor schedules individual meetings with students throughout the semester to discuss their progress, address concerns, and provide personalized feedback on their understanding of the course material.
These continuous feedback mechanisms help students identify areas of misunderstanding, develop self-assessment skills, and receive ongoing support throughout the course.
References
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., & Kim, N. J. (2015). A Bayesian network meta-analysis to synthesize the influence of contexts of scaffolding use on cognitive outcomes in STEM education. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 309-344.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
Boud, D. (2001). Using journal writing to enhance reflective practice. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 2001(90), 9-18. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
Loughran, J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33-43.
Moon, J. A. (2006). Learning Journals: A handbook for reflective practice and professional development. London: Routledge.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219-225.
Reiser, B. J., & Tabak, I. (2014). Scaffolding. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 44-62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thorpe, K. (2004). Reflective learning journals: From concept to practice. Reflective Practice, 5(3), 327-343.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
