I took an evidence-based teaching course in grad school, and one of the things that really stuck with me was this idea that teaching should be continually framed around clear learning goals and a growth-oriented mindset.
I think a clear value proposition is something that’s really lacking for students at all levels. I remember a lot of vague “you’ll need this later” sentiment from my time in school, which is just not motivating.
That and counteracting the “I’m just not good at math (or whatever subject)” mentality would go a long way to addressing this self-learning issue
This is something I’m interested in. What did the course cover — things like active and passive learning, and constructionism? Does the book Ultralearning cover most of the same things? (Here is a summary: https://www.njlifehacks.com/ultralearning-by-scott-young-boo...)
The course is CMU’s 38-801 (evidence based teaching in STEM). I don’t think there is a course website, but CMU’s course design page has a pretty good overview of the material covered [0]. It was a cool project-based course that covered a lot of different teaching methods (including active learning), assessment and feedback, and course design. A lot of this was motivated by primary teaching and learning literature. We also read through this book [1], which I found pretty interesting.
The learning principles in the summary you linked are also major themes we covered in the course, but I think the emphasis is a bit different because the 38-801 audience is primarily future educators (who are of course also lifelong learners)
I think a clear value proposition is something that’s really lacking for students at all levels. I remember a lot of vague “you’ll need this later” sentiment from my time in school, which is just not motivating.
That and counteracting the “I’m just not good at math (or whatever subject)” mentality would go a long way to addressing this self-learning issue