<p>Leaders in business, government, and education have sought to improve students&rsquo; ability to think critically. While research on professional learning communities (PLCs) suggests PLCs positively impact standardized test scores and teacher efficacy, there is little evidence of how PLCs using inquiry protocols influence teachers&rsquo; perceptions of instructional design for critical thinking and understanding students&rsquo; critical thinking. Demands for critical thinking instruction rather than test preparation, plus teachers&rsquo; misunderstanding of their students&rsquo; critical thinking, support the purpose for this case study. This study examined how PLCs using inquiry protocols influence teachers&rsquo; perceptions of instructional design for critical thinking and understanding students&rsquo; critical thinking. The theoretical framework for this study drew from several theories, its emphasis was on constructivism in PLCs&rsquo; use of inquiry protocols and critical thinking. PLC participants from an existing PLC agreed to join the study when asked during a PLC meeting. Eleven voluntary participants taught in 3 different grade levels and 8 subject areas. An inductive analysis of participant field notes, transcripts from PLC sessions, and group interviews indicated a divergence in participant understanding. Participants reflected either clarity or confusion in designing critical thinking projects and understanding students&rsquo; critical thinking. Implications for a positive social change develop as the PLC becomes a model for other classroom teachers seeking to teach beyond state testing mandates. This study addressed the district&rsquo;s perceived need to advance instruction for critical thinking. PLC stakeholders seeking to maximize teacher clarity and minimize teacher confusion around critical thinking may use this study to identify actions to emulate as well as actions to eliminate. </p>

Abstract not available.

Abstract not available.

<p> This study sought to identify the instructional strategies used by developmental mathematics instructors in Missouri&rsquo;s public 2-year colleges to engage students in the learning process, determine the cognitive complexity of the instructional strategies, and find out the support needed by these instructors to engage their students in the learning process. A sequential mixed method design was employed in which quantitative and qualitative data was collected. Initial participants in this study included developmental mathematics instructors from all 13 of Missouri&rsquo;s 2-year public community colleges, making for a total of 494 instructors. Quantitative data statistical analysis was completed on the demographic data, as well as on the rating and implementation of recommended instructional strategies using the <i>Qualtrics</i> survey tool. Qualitative analysis was completed on the instructor descriptions of strategies for engaging students in the learning process. Additionally, three participants were chosen from the survey for case study analysis in which three observations, post-observation interviews, and artifact collections were used to obtain more extensive qualitative data.</p><p> Results indicate that developmental mathematics instructors describe the methods they use to engage students in the learning process comparably to those instructional strategies as recommended by the American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges (AMATYC, 2006) to promote active learning, while also including additional strategies. How the instructors rated the instructional strategies as recommended by AMATYC (2006) are given in depth. An overview of the instructional strategies employed by three instructors who were observed, and the cognitive complexity of the tasks and questions used in these instructional strategies is given. Furthermore, recommendations are given for the support needed by developmental mathematics instructors to aid them in engaging their students in the learning process. Implications are offered for the (1) AMATYC (2006) Framework, (2) Professional development on discovery-based learning, (3) Professional development on cognitive complexity of tasks and questions, and (4) Support needed to implement instructional strategies.</p>

<p> This qualitative study examined low achieving online learners' uses of social self-regulated learning strategies. Research has shown that low achieving online learners lack strategies for self-regulated learning, which directly relates to their lack of achievement. Social self-regulated learning strategies examined in this study included help seeking, social comparison and social interactions. As learners constructed meaning and struggled with content, interactions between learners and peers, the instructor/instructor's assistant, technical support, and materials facilitated the process. Low achieving online learners resisted utilizing social self-regulated learning strategies. However, according to the research, little data was collected from low achieving online learners directly. This study asked low achieving online learners to describe their experiences, through semi-structured interviews. Barriers to social self-regulated learning strategies included poor attitudes, internet addiction, and exterior blame, according to the research. Self-regulated learning, in general, is linked to higher achievement. This study found that low achieving online learners lacked the use of social self-regulated learning strategies. Additionally, participants lacked help seeking behaviors, experienced social isolation, and held negative views of their classmates and instructor. The findings in this study may assist instructional designers to increase opportunities for social self-regulated learning in online courses, which may, in turn, increase achievement.</p>

<p> Students possess various learning styles and do not respond equally to the same instructional methods. College students today are often uninterested in their current traditional course design. The purpose of this study was to determine if differences exist in learning styles between students who select a traditional course delivery method versus a technology-enhanced course delivery method. Participants included 113 males and 195 females who were enrolled in a College of Business Principles of Marketing course for non-business majors at a large university in the southeast. The students who were enrolled in the course completed an online questionnaire including the Grasha-Reichmann Student Learning Style Scale (GRSLSS) and demographic questions. The GRSLSS consists of six learning styles: competitive, collaborative, avoidant, participant, dependent, and independent. A causal-comparative research design was used to identify a cause-effect relationship between the two groups of students. </p><p> Data analyses included a factorial multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analyses of variances (ANOVAs). Results from this study indicated a significant difference in course delivery methods and gender across all learning styles and no interactions between course delivery methods and gender. ANOVAs revealed a significant difference between the independent, avoidant, dependent, and participant learning styles between students who enrolled in the traditional and technology-enhanced course delivery methods. Students who enrolled in the traditional course delivery method had more of a dependent and participant learning style and students who enrolled in the technology-enhanced course delivery method had more of an independent and avoidant learning style. Males who enrolled in the course had more of a competitive learning style than females - regardless of the course delivery method. These findings are relevant for a better understanding of why students select a particular course delivery method.</p>

<p> For decades, scholars have searched for ways to more effectively teach and practice instructional design. A variety of strategies have been employed to address the ambiguity in and challenges of the field. Much of the focus in the education of instructional designers has been on teaching students how best to use the many models developed for the field (Rowling, 1992). These efforts, while meant to help the new instructional designer succeed, have often been stifled by the ever-changing landscape of what instructional designers are asked to do in their roles after graduation (Kenny, Zhang, Schwier, &amp; Campbell, 2005). Other research centers around the ways students can fuse their new instructional design knowledge with practical activities. </p><p> While many scholars have begun to focus on alternative methods for preparing instructional designers and improving instructional design processes, instructional designers themselves have been neglected. We teach instructional designers about the profession before we have truly understood the professional. From a teaching standpoint, this approach contradicts the very foundation of instructional design education: that of recognizing that the learners/users are at the center of instructional design (Cennamo &amp; Kalk, 2004). The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine instructional designers during design by engaging them in structured reflection as (a.) a way to better understand instructional designers in the design space and (b.) a technique for instructional designers to improve their design. Seven designers were asked to explore their thoughts, feelings, and experiences over six weeks while engaged in a design project. </p><p> This study used various data collection methods including reflection journals, interviews, and surveys. The Self-Reflection Insight Scale (SRIS) and REFLECT rubric were utilized to measure reflection abilities, and grounded theory was employed to conceptualize the data (Strauss &amp; Corbin, 1990), while concentrating on discovery and the development of theory (Charmaz, 1983). </p><p> Results showed that each designer is unique; designers rely on distinctive designer precedents; designers perceive reflection to positively impact their design products; designers' depth of reflection waxes and wanes; and designers reflect more deeply when provided with feedback.</p>

<p> Practitioners have agreed that service-learning programs or curricula guide students into developing a more robust connection to the community in which they live as well as amongst other members of that community (Eyler, Giles, Stenson, &amp; Gray, 2001). However, what isn&rsquo;t known extensively is <i>how</i> these outcomes have been generated (Kiely, 2005a). Based upon Milne&rsquo;s (2000) <i>reflective artmaking</i>, this arts-based ethnographic study introduces the terminology <i>reflective artmaking service-learning</i>, demonstrating how the coupled learning processes of reflective artmaking and service-learning respond to the call for research. The Capacities for Imaginative Learning (Holzer, 2009) facilitated my ethnographic analysis, providing specificity towards deconstructing the underlying mechanisms of processing and filtering. Conducted in Texas among Christian homeschool students, this study inquires, how does reflective artmaking coupled with service-learning help to make the underlying concept of &ldquo;community&rdquo; visible? This ethnographic study focuses on the educative (Dewey, 1938) value of an arts-infused program with Christian homeschooled youth (ages 11-17) in Texas. Significant findings include the ways in which experiential learning based on a constructivist epistemology and a focus on the self was a suitable, but yet limiting, theoretical framework. Suggestions include ways to use reflective artmaking coupled with service-learning to enhance the authenticity and applicability of projects and thus to enhance student interest and ownership. This study provides a broad set practitioners in educational programs and public, private, and home schools with practical, innovative, substantive, and customizable methods of incorporating arts-based reflection on civic engagement within their teaching practices.</p><p>

Following is a study that explores learning in community in a fully-integrated, team taught course at a community college in New England. These classes, Learning Communities (LCs) represent rich opportunities for exploring and practicing democratic education. From a theoretical grounding in social learning theories and an exploration into learning and community as active, ongoing phenomena, I present narrative, relational research as enactment. Data from field notes, interviews, focus groups and researcher reflections inform findings and analysis. I represent this as an experience parallel to — not claiming either to mirror or replace — the experiences of the other participants. In these findings, I identify a duality of circles and lines, with circles representing open inquiry, community, collaboration, and democratic discourse. Lines represent reification, hierarchical and binary thinking, and the threat of positivism. Long hours, intense interactions, openness to collaboration, flexible pedagogy, and emerging curriculum all make for complicated relationships that allow for questions, confusions and tensions around what it means to know, who gets to decide, and what are the parameters and epistemologies of academic disciplines. I hope, through this text, to report, celebrate, and participate in these conversations.

<p> The purpose of this study was to develop an effective instrument to measure student readiness in online learning with reliable predictors of online learning success factors such as learning outcomes and learner satisfaction. The validity and reliability of the Student Online Learning Readiness (SOLR) instrument were tested using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis. Twenty items from three competencies, i.e. social competencies, communication competencies, and technical competencies, were designated for the initial instrument based on the Student Online Learning Readiness (SOLR) Model as a new conceptual model. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed that four factor-structures of the instrument of student readiness in online learning explained 66.69% of the variance in the pattern of relationships among the items. All four factors had high reliabilities (all at or above Cronbach's alpha> .823). Twenty items remained in the final questionnaire after deleting one item which cross-loaded on multiple factors (social competencies with classmates: five items, social competencies with instructor: five items, communication competencies: four items, and technical competencies: six items). The four-factor structure of the Student Online Learning Readiness (SOLR) has been confirmed through this study. Educators can use the Student Online Learning Readiness (SOLR) instrument in order to discover a better understanding of the level of freshmen college students' online learning readiness by measuring their social, communication, and technical competencies. In addition, this study was looking at two factors of social integration in Tinto's SIM and has introduced the Student Online Learning Readiness (SOLR) conceptual model with the purpose to extend Tinto's social integration to online learning environment. </p>