Dr. Zakaria Jouaibi, Senior Instructional Designer at North Carolina Central University, was on another Quality Matters (QM) webinar that I watched. I’m also taking a QM course with Jouaibi this week and have been hearing about the TILT (Transparency in Learning and Teaching) assignment framework on a couple of podcasts. That’s why this video caught my attention. Entitled “A Comprehensive Framework for Assignment Design,” this video was posted last year on May 7th, 2020. This session was part of the QM East Regional conference in April 2020.
Jouaibi began by introducing the goals of the session and explained that the session would be interactive using Nearpod. This software system seems similar to TopHat: you can display slides and include interactivity. The session outcomes stated by Jouaibi included defining the TILT framework. Jouaibi showed an example of an assignment that wasn’t very helpful because it didn’t provide a connection to the course objectives. Jouaibi presented a framework: ATSA that stands for Alignment, Transparency, Scaffolding, and Authenticity. This framework was then compared to the QM Standards related to Alignment: 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, and 6.1. Jouaibi emphasized that the assignment must align with: course and module level objectives, instructional materials, learning activities, and instructional technologies. This is fresh in my mind as I am working on the QM Evaluating Your Course Design (EYCD) module this week, and the course assignments forced me to look at each element and evaluate alignment.
Jouaibi then discussed transparent teaching and cited Winkelmes 2013 and the definition below:
Transparent Teaching: Using methods and strategies that explicitly explain to the students why they are learning course content and how they will be able to learn it.
Zakaria Jouaibi, QM 2020 citing Winkelmes 2013
I had heard about TILT and a little about Winkelmes, yet never before heard this useful explanation. Jouaibi displayed a graphic that broke the Transparency in Learning and Teaching into three main components:
- Purpose: explaining to our students skills and knowledge to be gained and their connection to the learning objectives as well as students’ lives. This last connection is one I need to work on and clearly state.
- Task: the task that students will do and how they will do it.
- Criteria: the success criteria listed in rubrics, checklists, or examples of work.
Jouaibi discussed the QM 3.3 and 4.2 standards and their connection to transparent assignments, stressing a clear explanation of the relationship of the instructional materials and the learning activities & assessments. By clearly explaining the assignment rationale, learners are less likely to consider it busy work, mentioned Jouaibi.
The scaffolding principle when applied to assignments highlights the interconnection of activities to provide practice, offer debriefing and continuous feedback, and sequence tasks into manageable and meaningful interactions with the content. The QM standards 3.4, 3.5, 5.2, 5.3, 6.1, and 6.2, mentioned Jouaibi, relate to scaffolding of assignments in a way. I thought the point made by Jouaibi about not overwhelming learners by scaffolding through “digestible parcels” is one lesson I have learned and continue to try to implement this past year.
Jouaibi then described the last component of this framework for assignment design: the authenticity principle. Transparent assignments, according to Jouaibi, should “mimic real world tasks, be problem-based, enable students to assume a role beyond learners, lead to product with a value”. I do agree with all these points, though I still struggle designing assignments and conveying authenticity to students.
Jouaibi summarized that the ATSA model results in better retention and performance (citing Winkelness 2016), growth mindset (citing Dweck 2006), grit (citing Duckworth 2016), and self-regulated learners (citing Nelson 2013 – should this be Linda Nilson?). Jouaibi explained that by applying this framework, we can encourage learners to improve, incorporate feedback (by including opportunities!), and become self-regulated learners. I strongly believe opportunities to improve are essential: without the chance to incorporate feedback, assignments are by definition one-and-done! Jouaibi displayed a graphic about the ASTA Framework that I found on the QM site. At the end of the session, Jouaibi went over an assignment example template and emphasized the transparent assignment elements:
- description and purpose (after the learning objectives!),
- step-by-step directions,
- the assessment criteria, and
- then the technology needed/materials.
This session was short and packed full of useful resources. I took lots of notes above, and now I’m really excited about the upcoming course with Zakaria Jouaibi! It is ironic that we have instructional design experts that are nationally recognized both on campus and 20-minutes away at NC Central University. I hope to learn more from these fantastic people!
