Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery (LFM)

ReSearch on Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery (LFM)

Articles

• In 'Flipped' Classrooms, A Method for Mastery - http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/23/in-flipped-classrooms-a-method-for-mastery/?smid=pl-share&_r=0

Research Papers

• Bloom, Benjamin S. (March 1968). "Learning for Mastery". UCLA - CSEIP - Evaluation Comment. - http://programs.honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/sites/programs.honolulu.hawaii.edu.intranet/files/upstf-student-success-bloom-1968.pdf
• Bloom, Benjamin S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780070061170.
• Daniel U. Levine (1985). Improving student achievement through mastery learning programs. Jossey-Bass. ISBN 9780875896458.
• Anderson, Lorin W. (March 1975). "Major Assumptions of Mastery Learning". Annual Meeting of the Southeast Psychological Association
• James H. Block (1971). Mastery learning: theory and practice. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. - https://books.google.ca/books?id=OSCdAAAAMAAJ
• Anderson, Stephen A. (1994). "Synthesis of Research on Mastery Learning" . ERIC Archives.- http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED382567.pdf
• Guskey, T.R. (2007). "Closing Achievement Gaps:Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom's "Learning for Mastery". Journal of Advanced
• Academics. 19: 8–31.
• Bloom, B. S., & Carroll, J. B. (1971). Mastery learning: Theory and practice. J. H. Block (Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
• Arlin, Marshall. (1984). "Time, Equality, and Mastery Learning". Review of Educational Research. 54 (1): 65–86. doi:10.3102/00346543054001065 - http://rer.sagepub.com/content/54/1/65
• Arlin, Marshall (1984). "Time variability in mastery learning". American Educational Research Journal. 21: 103–120. doi:10.3102/00028312021001103 - http://aer.sagepub.com/content/21/1/103
• Kulik, C. L.; Kulik, J.A.; Bangert-Drowns, J (1990). "Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis". Review of Educational Research. 60 (1): 265–299. doi:10.3102/00346543060002265. - http://rer.sagepub.com/content/60/2/265
• Lai, Patrick; Biggs, John (1994). "Who benefits from Mastery Learning?". Contemporary Educational Psychology. 19: 13–23. doi:10.1006/ceps.1994.1002. - https://dx.doi.org/10.1006%2Fceps.1994.1002
• Saiter, Susan (1983-01-09). "MASTERY LEARNING ON A GRAND SCALE; CHICAGO". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 - http://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/09/education/mastery-learning-on-a-grand-scale-chicago.html
• T.R. Guskey (2009). Mastery Learning in 21st Century education: A reference handbook, vol 1 ed. T.L. Good. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Guskey, T.R.; Pigott, T.D. (1988). "Research on group-based mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis". Journal of Educational Research. 4 (81): 197–216. doi:10.1080/00220671.1988.1088582

Concepts on Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery (LFM)

What is Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery (LFM)?

• Definition
  • set of group-based, individualized, teaching and learning strategies based on the premise that students will achieve a high level of understanding in a given domain if they are given enough timeInstructional strategy and Educational philosophy
• First proposed by Benjamin S Bloom 1968
• students must achieve a level of mastery (e.g. 90% on a knowledge test) in prerequisite knowledge before moving forward to learn subsequent information.
• If a student does not achieve mastery on the test, they are given additional support in a cycle until they may move on to the next stage.
• Focus of instruction: Time required for different students to learn same material and achieve same level of mastery
  • Different from classic models of teaching: Focus on differences in students' ability and all students given same amount of time to learn and same set of instructions
• Shift in Responsibility so that students' failure is due to instruction and not lack of ability on his/her part.
• Mastery Learning Environments is about providing enough time and employing instructional strategies so all students can achieve same level of learning

Related Concepts of Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery

• Individualized instruction
  • some elements in common with mastery learning, although it dispenses with group activities in favor of allowing more capable or more motivated students to progress ahead of others while maximizing teacher interaction with those students who need the most assistance.
• Bloom's 2 Sigma Problem
  • an educational phenomenon observed where the average student tutored one-to-one (using mastery learning techniques) performed two standard deviations better than students who learn via conventional instructional methods.
• "Flipped Mastery" (coined by Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams, both chemistry teachers.)
  • An implementation model for Mastery Learning that is mixed with flipped classroom.
  • use technology to time-shift the individual instruction and eliminate whole-class lectures.
  • The students watch online lectures and move through the content at their own pace. In this way technology frees up the teachers to individualize the learning for each student.[6]

What are the Motivations for Implementing Mastery Learning?

• To reduce achievement Gaps for students in average school classrooms (see Graphs)
  • if students are normally distributed with respect to aptitude for a subject and if they are provided uniform instruction (in terms of quality and learning time), then achievement level at completion of the subject is also expected to be normally distributed. (Graph)
  • if each learner were to receive optimal quality of instruction and as much learning time as they require, then a majority of students could be expected to attain mastery. (Graph)
• educators preemptively use the normal curve for grading students.
  • creates expectation by the teachers that some students will naturally be successful while others will not.
  • Bloom defended that, if educators are effective, the distribution of achievement could and should be very different from the normal curve.
  • Bloom proposed Mastery Learning as a way to address this. the majority of students (more than 90 percent) would achieve successful and rewarding learning.
• As an added advantage, Mastery Learning was also thought to create more positive interest and attitude towards the subject learned if compared with usual classroom methods

How is Mastery Learning/ Learning for Mastery (LFM) like in Modern Times?

• One of the most highly investigated teaching methods.
  • Though highly criticised, was also found to have resounding success when implemented correctly
  • See Meta-analysis by Guskey & Pigott (1988) Courses e.g. science, probability and social studies yielded most consistent positive results while other subjects were varied.
  • See Meta-analysis by Kulik et al (1990). Positive effects with students reporting positive attitudes toward this style of learning and most effective for weaker students.
• Mastery programmes usually replaced by traditional forms of instruction due to level of commitment required by teacher and difficulty in managing the classroom when each student is following an individual course of learning
• Central Tenets Found in many modern teaching strategies such as
  • Differentiated Instruction
  • Understanding by Design

Reference

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastery_learning

Guides on Learning For Mastery (LFM) by Bloom

Conditions for students to attain high level of learning Capability

• instruction is approached sensitively and systematically
• students are helped when and where they have learning difficulties
• students are given sufficient time to achieve mastery
• there is some clear criterion of what constitutes mastery.[15]

Variables that influence achievement levels and learning outcomes (Bloom's Arguments)

• Aptitude as measured by standard aptitude tests, and "the amount of time required by the learner to attain mastery of a learning task".
  • majority of students can achieve mastery in a learning task, but the time that they need to spend on is different.
  • there are 1 to 5 percent of students who have special talent for learning a subject (especially music and foreign languages) and there are also around five percent of students who have special disability for learning a subject. For other 90% of students, aptitude is merely an indicator of the rate of learning.
  • attitude for a learning task is not constant and can be changed by environmental conditions or learning experience at school or home.
• Quality of instruction: degree to which the presentation, explanation, and ordering of elements of the task to be learned approach the optimum for a given learner.
  • quality of instruction has to be evaluated according to its effect on individual students rather than on random groups of students.
  • while in traditional classrooms, the relationship between students aptitude test for mathematics and their final grade in algebra is very high, this relationship is almost zero for students who are receiving tutorial instruction in the home.
  • a good tutor tries to find the quality of learning best fit to the given students, thus majority of students would be able to master a subject if they have access to a good tutor.
• Ability to understand instruction: the nature of the task that a learner is to learn and the procedure that the learner is to follow.
  • Verbal ability and reading comprehension are two language abilities that are highly related to student achievements. Since the ability to understand instruction varies significantly among students, Bloom recommends that teachers modify their instruction, provide help, and teaching aids to fit the needs of different students.
  • Some of the teaching aids that could be provided according to the ability of the learner are:
    • Alternative Textbooks
    • Group Studies and Peer Tutoring
    • Workbooks
    • Programmed Instruction Units
    • Audiovisual Methods
    • Academic Games
    • Laboratory experiences
    • Simple demonstrations
    • Puzzles
• Perseverance: the time the learner is willing to spend in learning.
  • a student who demonstrates a low level of perseverance in one learning task might have a very high level of perseverance in a different learning task.
  • A students' perseverance can be enhanced by increasing the frequency of reward and providing evidence of success in learning.
  • teachers should use frequent feedback accompanied by specific help to improve the quality of instruction, thus reducing the perseverance required for learning.
• Time allowed for learning
  • According to the International Study of Education in 12 countries, if the top 5% of students are omitted, the ratio of the time needed for slower and faster learners of a subject such as mathematics is 6 to 1 while there is zero or slightly negative relationship between the final grades and the amount of time spent on homework. Thus, the amount of time spent on homework is not a good indicator of mastery in a subject.
  • Bloom postulates that the time required for a learner to achieve mastery in a specific subject is affected by various factors such as:
    • the student's aptitude for that subject,
    • The student's verbal ability,
    • the quality of instruction, and
    • the quality of the help provided.

LFM Strategies

• LFM Curricula
  • Discrete topics where all students begin together.
  • Students given a meaningful and formative assessment for teachers to conclude if an objective has been mastered
    • If a student has mastered, he will begin a path of enrichment activities that correspond and build upon the original objective
    • If a student has not demonstrated mastery, a series of correctives such as
      • varying activities
      • individualised instruction
      • Additional time to complete assignments
    • Students will receive constructive feedback on their work and encouraged to revise and revisit their assignment unitl Objective is mastered
• Preconditions for Process of Mastery Learning
  • Objectives and content of instruction have to be specified and clarified to both students and teacher
  • summative evaluation criteria should be developed and both teacher and learner should be clear about achievement criteria
  • Absolute standards are more appropriate than competitive criteria to help student collaborate and facilitate mastery
• Operating Procedures: Methods used to provide detailed feedback and instructional help to facilitate process of mastery in learning
  • Formative Evaluation
    • Diagnostic progress tests to determine if student has mastered subject unit.
    • Diagnostic process has to be followed by a presciption and the result is better to express in not-grade format as use of grades on reapeated progress evaluations prepare student for accepting a level of learning less than mastery.
  • Alternative Learning Ressources
    • progress tests should be followed by detailed feedback and specific suggestions so that the students could work on their difficulties.
    • Small groups of students (two or three) meet and work together
    • Tutorial help
    • Reviewing the instructional material
    • Reading alternative textbooks
    • Using workbook or programmed texts
    • Using selected audiovisual materials
• Assessment
  • Teacher directs a variety of group-based instructional techniques, with frequent and specific feedback by using diagnostic, formative tests, as well as regularly correcting mistakes students make along their learning path.
  • Assessment in the mastery learning classroom is not used as a measure of accountability but rather as a source of evidence to guide future instruction.
  • A teacher using the mastery approach will use the evidence generated from his or her assessment to modify activities to best serve each student.
  • Teachers evaluate students with criterion-referenced tests rather than norm-referenced tests. In this sense, students are not competing against each other, but rather competing against themselves in order to achieve a personal best.

Criticisms of Learning for Mastery

• Time-achievement equality dilemma
  • In order to have all students reach a prescribed level of mastery (i.e. 80-90% on a test). some students will require more time than others, either in practice or instruction, to achieve success.
  • The Time-Achievement Equality Dilemma refers to this relationship between time and achievement in the context of individual differences. If you hold achievement constant, time will need to vary. If time is held constant (as with modern learning models), achievement will vary. Mastery Theory doesn't accurately address this relationship.[27]
  • Bloom's original theory assumes that with practice, the slower learners will become faster learners and the gap of individual differences will disappear.
  • Bloom believes these differences in learning pace occur because of lack of prerequisite knowledge and if all children have the same prerequisite knowledge, then learning will progress at the same rate. Bloom places the blame on teaching settings where students aren't given enough time to reach mastery levels in prerequisite knowledge before moving on to the new lesson. He also uses this to explain why variance in student learning is smaller in the first grade when compared to students in the 7th grade (the smart get smarter, and the slower fall further behind). He referred to this learning rate variance as the Vanishing Point.
  • A four-year longitudinal study by Arlin (1984) found no indication of a vanishing point in students who learned arithmetic through a mastery approach. Students who required extra assistance to learn material in the first year of the study required relatively the same amount of additional instruction in the 4th year. Individual differences in learning rates appear to be impacted by more than just method of instruction, contrary to Bloom's opinions.
• Methodology errors in research
  • Experimental vs. control group
    • In studies investigating the effectiveness of mastery learning, control and experimental groups were not always valid.
    • Experimental groups typically consisted of courses that were developed to adhere to the best principles of mastery. However, control groups were sometimes existing classes to use as a comparison. This poses a problem since there was no way to test the effectiveness of the control group to begin with - it could have been a poorly constructed course being compared against a strictly designed mastery course.
  • Measurement tools
    • In studies where the largest effect sizes were found, experimenter made tests were used to test the mastery levels of students in the experiments. By using tests designed for the experiment, the mastery instruction intervention may have been able to better tailor the learning goals of the class to align with the measurement tool. Conversely, these dramatic effect sizes essentially disappeared when standardized tests were used to measure mastery levels in control and experimental groups
  • Study duration
    • There are very few studies that investigate the long-term effects of mastery learning. Many studies included an arbitrary 3-4 week intervention period and results were based on findings from this time period. It's important to consider the length of time students were immersed in a mastery learning program to get a greater understanding of the long-term effects of this teaching strategy.
• General Concerns and Opinions
  • Focus in surface rather than deep processing of information
    • Typical mastery programs involve providing class instruction then testing using reliable tools (i.e. multiple choice unit test). This format of learning may only be beneficial to learners who are interested in surface rather than deep processing of information. This contradicts many of today's modern learning approaches which focus less on direct assessment of knowledge, and more on creating meaningful applications and interpretations of the obtained knowledge (see Constructivism (philosophy of education))
  • Focus on Testing
    • A concern is that children were taught to pass tests without a focus on enduring skills.
    • The duration of the retention of skills was questioned. [32] A love of reading was not promoted. Students rarely read books or stories. Student failure was an aspect of the program design. 80% was required on 80% of the test to pass. This resulted in huge retention levels.
  • The Value of Success
    • If the goal of education became having children become experts, grades would become much less varied. That is, you would theoretically have a high school graduating class all with grades above 90%. Universities would have to make selections from a pool of applicants with similar grades, how would admission requirements have to change to account for uniform ratings of intelligence? Would time it took to reach mastery become a new measure of success? These questions about the wider implications of mastery as a new standard raise discussion about its actual value.

Outcomes of Learning For Mastery

• Cognitive Outcomes: Increase in student excellence in a subject
  • Applying strategies of mastery learning in a class resulted in the increase of students with grade A from 20% to 80%
• Affective Outcomes: sense of self-efficacy and confidence in learners
  • When society (through education system) recognizes a learner's mastery, profound changes happen in his or her view of self and the outer world.
  • Learner start believing that he/she able to
    • adequately cope with problems
    • have higher motivation for learning the subject in a higher level of expertise
    • Have a better mental state due to less feeling of frustration
    • Lifelong learning is a necessity, mastery learning can develop a lifelong interest and motivation in learning

Reference

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastery_learning

Guide on the Personalised System of Instruction (PSI) or Keller Plan

What is the Personalized System of Instruction (PSI) or Keller Plan?

• A course developed by Fred Keller and colleagues in the mid 1960s using Mastery Learning Theory
• Based on the idea of reinforcement in teaching processes.
• "This is a course through which you may move, from start to finish, at your own pace. You will not be held back by other students or forced to go ahead until you are ready. At best, you may meet all the course requirements in less than one semester; at worst, you may not complete the job within that time. How fast you go is up to you" (Keller, 1968, pg 80-81)

What are the 5 Elements of PSI?

1. The go-at-your-own-pace feature: permits a student to move through the course at a speed commensurate with his ability and other demands upon his time.
2. The unit-perfection requirement for advance: lets the student go ahead to new material only after demonstrating mastery of that which preceded.
3. The use of lectures and demonstrations as vehicles of motivation, rather than sources of critical information.
4. The related stress upon the written word in teacher-student communication.
5. The use of proctors, which permits repeated testing, immediate scoring, almost unavoidable tutoring, and a marked enhancement of the personal-social aspect of the educational process"