Presentation: 2015 Building Technology Educators’ Society

Comparative Curricular Adjacencies in Material Education

June 24-27, 2015 – University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT

Curriculum development for any course should never be static. This is particularly true in courses whose deliverable content can be so heavily influenced by changing trends, new products, material innovations, emerging technology, or advanced building systems. While the content is paramount, it is the course structure and delivery method that can most influence and predict the effectiveness of teaching and subsequent learning outcomes.

This poster provides a year-by-year and side-by-side graphic analysis of a Materials course from the past three years. The evolution of the course is thus represented utilizing various methods and key indicators for thoughtful analysis and reflection. First, is a chronological graph depicting the number of class periods provided throughout the semester with their assigned course content area (i.e. Lecture, Presentation, Field Trip, Test, Workshop, and Open Lab) and their linear adjacencies. Also included are the assignment durations, as related to the patterned layout of course content areas. Second, with an understanding that lecture-based instruction results in 20% or less retention of information, a proportional diagram of lecture to other activities is provided. Third, course content areas are described as a percentage of the division of all activities provided. Next, content areas are proportionally divided based on their most commonly associated activity relationships – Dissemination Activities, Application Activities, and Assessment Activities. Lastly, content areas are categorized based on their Passive, Semi-Passive, or Active learning environments.

The outcome of the analysis of these courses demonstrates a moving towards a ‘Scaffolding’ instructional model, wherein the teaching or peer (the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) as defined by Lev Vygotsky) provides assistance dependent on the level needed to support learning. As responsibility is taken or tasked are mastered the MKO begins the process of ‘fading’, or the gradual removal of supportive scaffolding. Thus enabling the learner to work independently.

“Scaffolding is actually a bridge used to build upon what students already know to arrive at something they do not know. If scaffolding is properly administered, it will act as an enabler, not a disabler”

Benson, B. (1997). Scaffolding (Coming to Terms). English Journal, 86(7), 126-127.

Poster_PDF_Comparative Curricular Adjacencies in Material Education