FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2563737182> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2563737182 endingPage "288" @default.
• W2563737182 startingPage "281" @default.
• W2563737182 abstract "INTRODUCTION College students increasingly arrive unprepared for the day's class activities. Many have not read the assigned material, or if they have, not in sufficient depth to allow them to move from a basic recognition level to being able to critically analyze, extend, or integrate topics. Owing to that lack of effort, a basic instructional tool for deep learning in the classroom, meaningful guided discussion across students, is immediately precluded. Lack of preparation is a problem that plagues four-year colleges and universities, running across disciplines from small liberal arts colleges to internationally known research institutions. It is empirical reality: students are not studying. Today's average student hits the books only about 15 hours per week (Lipka & Berrett, 2010). If a typical semester load is 1415 hours, students average only one hour of study for every hour in class. That is 1/2 to 1/3 of the two- to three-hour heuristic that most professors suggest to their students (Welker, 2012). Adding to the preparation gap is the fact that recent research points to an even more disappointing and continuing trend: the percentage of those who read assigned material prior to class is declining (Lineweaver, 2010). Students are not only reading less, but also are not practicing quantitative analysis and application in their coursework and, therefore, leave college without those essential life and work skills (Berrett & Sander, 2013). Furthermore, a significant number of students are avoiding courses that are more rigorous. The result is that many are not learning tools, techniques, and theories that they can use in the real-world to their immediate benefit. CBS News (2014) cites a study of 2,300 undergraduates from 24 collegiate schools that showed 45 percent of students demonstrate no significant improvement in critical thinking, critical reasoning, and writing skills by the end of their second year at university. The study suggests the blame rests with students that seek out easy courses and do not study, and a university culture that values faculty research productivity over quality teaching. Yet, students do not set out to fail. We suggest they haven't been challenged and, often, they don't know how to study. The purpose of this research is to present a successful quality management intervention that works to reverse the slide. We begin with a review of relevant literature, then present a resulting model of learning, follow with analysis, and end with discussion. LITERATURE REVIEW Bloom's work in the cognitive domain identified six ordered layers of knowledge (1956). The central thesis is that one moves systematically through each stratum of learning. At the lowest levels, one is simply involved in memorizing facts and terms. The focus is on identifying, defining, and matching. The ability to apply what was learned is non-existent at these basic levels. Analysis and application form the middle levels of the hierarchy. Here students are able to organize concepts and use them to solve problems. However, at the highest levels one has synthesized combinations of ideas and concepts, and is able to evaluate and extrapolate on the basis of what was learned. That is to say, one takes separate ideas and joins them in such a manner that a new whole is formed. For example, a student who has learned at these levels is able to encounter a difficult situation at work, take concepts learned in class, aggregate them, and apply that merged knowledge to appropriately attack the real-world problem that was previously un-encountered. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) flipped the top two strata of Bloom's work. Their layers are remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. Remembering and understanding still cluster on recall and definitions. The middle layers center on distinguishing and using concepts. The focus of evaluation is being able to defend or justify a position; and creating is the ability to extend to some new approach. …" @default.
• W2563737182 created "2017-01-06" @default.
• W2563737182 creator A5014029348 @default.
• W2563737182 creator A5024082236 @default.
• W2563737182 creator A5086560514 @default.
• W2563737182 date "2015-07-01" @default.
• W2563737182 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2563737182 title "Attacking Classroom Apathy" @default.
• W2563737182 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2563737182 type Work @default.
• W2563737182 sameAs 2563737182 @default.
• W2563737182 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2563737182 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2563737182 hasAuthorship W2563737182A5014029348 @default.
• W2563737182 hasAuthorship W2563737182A5024082236 @default.
• W2563737182 hasAuthorship W2563737182A5086560514 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C2777212361 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C2781110425 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C37413474 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C120912362 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C145420912 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C154945302 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C15744967 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C17744445 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C199539241 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C2777212361 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C2781110425 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C37413474 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C41008148 @default.
• W2563737182 hasConceptScore W2563737182C554936623 @default.
• W2563737182 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2563737182 hasLocation W25637371821 @default.
• W2563737182 hasOpenAccess W2563737182 @default.
• W2563737182 hasPrimaryLocation W25637371821 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W107411768 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W134554198 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W138038439 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W14248547 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W1513877877 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W168341170 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2159735000 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2291496603 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W246122482 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W24686480 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2590955778 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2601861527 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2606626573 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W272370116 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W324695452 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W584873085 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W757173617 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W966398402 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W220662705 @default.
• W2563737182 hasRelatedWork W2549507669 @default.
• W2563737182 hasVolume "19" @default.
• W2563737182 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2563737182 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2563737182 magId "2563737182" @default.
• W2563737182 workType "article" @default.