How can adaptive courseware improve learning experiences for both students and instructors? Dr. Jeff Watson, instructor in the School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies at Arizona State University, shares his perspective.
Dr. Watson partnered with CogBooks, now part of Cambridge University Press, to create a custom Introduction to Logic course, PHI 103: Principles of Sound Reasoning. Read on to learn more about his experience partnering with us as a course author and instructor.
What goals did you hope to achieve by building philosophy courseware with CogBooks (now Cambridge courseware)?
I had a few goals which happened to overlap.
First, I wanted to write an introductory logic course that would help non-majors understand why it was worth studying logic. For students taking the course for general education, it can be hard to motivate them to learn the abstract symbolization and other formal techniques studied in a logic course. So, I reorganized the course around the concept of building “intellectual virtue” or habits of better reasoning, which is good preparation not only for philosophy, but also for law or other areas where making a persuasive logical argument is important.
Second, I wanted students to actually read the course materials. I’ve found in the past I had to spend the whole time in class re-teaching what students were supposed to have read. Cambridge courseware provided a kind of accountability mechanism by letting students see their own progress through the course, and also letting them know that I could see their progress. If they come to class unprepared, they have to be honest with themselves and with me that this is what happened, because the courseware shows me exactly how much progress they have or haven’t made.
Third, I had the goal of “flipping” my classroom, so that students used time at home to study materials, do the embedded self-assessment exercises and quizzes in Cambridge courseware, and look at vetted secondary resources if they needed help. Rather than having the illusion of understanding during class and then discovering they need help while trying to do homework on their own, students recognize what they don’t understand prior to class and use class time to work through problems and get my immediate help.
Finally, it allowed me to move my course online. While I had designed the courseware for on-campus classes, since 2020 my logic courses have predominantly been online. So Cambridge courseware basically took the place of having to design a brand-new online course — I incorporated it into Canvas, along with some additional assignments and assessments, and I had an online course!
How has your approach to teaching changed with adaptive courseware?
My on-campus teaching has been a lot more fun using Cambridge courseware. Although I give a short “refresher” lecture at the start of class, it’s only about 15 minutes, because the expectation is that students have gone through the material before class. So, the remainder of the time I’m able to use for a lot of in-class assignments, usually problems that I want them to work on with one another in groups at tables, while I go around the room and answer questions. The atmosphere is more of the students actively trying to help each other learn, with me there as a resource, instead of the more oppositional atmosphere I had faced before.
Also, I’m now better able to revise my teaching based on the feedback I get from students. I hope down the road to revise the course or add resources to the course based on particular pages where students are indicating they are most confused, and the software provides me with this data.
What have you observed about your students' performance after you started using Cambridge courseware?
I think the majority who invest time into the class definitely get more out of the class post-Cambridge courseware than they did pre-Cambridge courseware. As far as the 20 percent who are interested in studying more advanced logic or philosophy, I’ve had them come back and express appreciation for the depth and breadth of the foundation they got in the course — they’re using what they learned in my class in their more advanced courses. As far as the 80 percent for whom it is their only logic or philosophy course, I’m especially happy that many of them feel they’ve come away with things that are valuable for the class. In more concrete terms, they’re writing better argument papers and able to get farther with proofs, so that’s progress.
Logic is hard, and there’s always a contingent of the class that doesn’t have time to study the subject. But I find that these students are more likely to take responsibility for their own learning after using Cambridge courseware. I think there’s more honest self-assessment and recognition by students about the role that their own time investment has in their learning. It empowers students and thus makes them feel more responsible for whether they do or don’t learn.
What advice would you share with instructors considering adaptive courseware for similar courses?
It was definitely a lot of work. Go in knowing there’s a significant time commitment as an author, particularly if there isn’t a lot of OER content for your discipline already out there.
A bit of specific advice — in terms of how to incorporate Cambridge courseware into the gradebook of your LMS, for me it’s more helpful to grade student completion and progress in the courseware than to use quizzing to assess correctness. Students get the most out of being rewarded for progressing and having the opportunity to fail, go back and review the material, correct themselves, and try again through the adaptive courseware. The stakes are low, anxiety is low, and there’s a positive reward just for going through things and trying, which tends to promote continuing to go through things and continuing to try. I use the tools in the LMS for assessing what they’ve learned after they’ve been through the courseware.
Overall, I’d definitely recommend it for those teaching on campus with an interest in flipping their classroom and doing more active learning and practice during class hours, but who are unsure whether their students will actually “do the work” at home of learning the foundations. Cambridge courseware gives that accountability tool which ensures a critical mass of students do the work at home, enough to set up a classroom expectation and atmosphere.
If you’re interested in partnering with Cambridge University Press to develop an adaptive course or courses, book a meeting with us.
