Visual Outcome Mapping of Learning Connections and Interventions for Higher Education

Dhaarna; Komal Handore

doi:10.56741/IISTR.jpes.001910

Authors

Dhaarna
dhaarna@cept.ac.in
CEPT University Ahmedabad https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6639-3674
Komal Handore NICMAR University Pune https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0999-8183

Keywords:

Higher Education, Higher Order Learning, Learner Development, Learning Connections, Visual Outcome Mapping

Abstract

Modern higher education is under siege, and various difficult issues have emerged as a result of changing students' needs and diverse learning styles. These include problems associated with curriculum design, student retention, quality of teaching and learning processes, and integration of technology. The modern technological tool named Visual Outcome Mapping (VOM) has evolved and has the potential to provide innovative solutions by acquiring, analyzing, and presenting data relevant to student performance in pursuit of effective personalized learning and timely feedback. The mapping is done between challenges, teaching methodologies, and levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy using VOM. The paper highlights that even small engagement and creative activities can lead to achieving higher-order skills. It elaborates how the usage of creative tools like GIS and Mentimeter leads to enhanced engagement, while real-life scenario integration, breakpoint activities, site visits, hands-on assignments, and continuous feedback have shown positive impacts on critical thinking and reduced instances of plagiarism. It focuses on teaching strategies that must be adapted to student needs and interdisciplinary learning must be emphasized. The VOM model was validated with the analysis of 108 survey samples collected from the students as feedback using the correlation technique. It concludes that students learn better with activities and they prepare students for the demands of the real world. VOM is a creative approach that addresses the challenges of modern education, ensuring that students are well-prepared for the workforce and committed to lifelong learning. The study paves the way for future research and scope.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Dhaarna, CEPT University Ahmedabad

is an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Planning, CEPT University, Ahmedabad, India. Her academic work focuses on urban planning, sustainable development, and spatial analysis. She is actively involved in teaching, research, and mentoring students in planning education. Her scholarly interests include inclusive urban design, community engagement, and evidence-based planning approaches. She contributes to academic publications and professional collaborations advancing innovative and context-responsive planning practices globally and internationally today. (email: dhaarna@cept.ac.in).

Komal Handore, NICMAR University Pune

is an Assistant Professor at the School of Architecture and Planning, NICMAR University, Pune, India. She specializes in architectural planning, urban development, and built environment studies. Her teaching integrates theory and practice, fostering critical thinking and professional competence among students. Her research interests include sustainable urban systems, infrastructure planning, and resilient design strategies. She actively engages in academic research, interdisciplinary collaboration, and scholarly dissemination in planning and architecture. (email: komal.handore@pune.nicmar.ac.in).

References

F. Sarker, H. Davis, and T. Tiropanis, “A Review of Higher Education Challenges and Data Infrastructure Responses,” in International Conference for Education Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), 2010.

M. Mentkowski and A. W. Astin, “Assessment for Excellence: The Philosophy and Practice of Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education.,” J. Higher Educ., vol. 63, no. 6, p. 717, Nov. 1992, doi: 10.2307/1982058. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1982058

G. D. Kuh and P. T. Ewell, “The state of learning outcomes assessment in the United States,” Higher Education Management and Policy, pp. 1–20, Feb. 2010.

K. M. Bella, “A STUDY ON CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS,” in National Conference on National Education Policy 2020 : Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education Institutions in India, 2024.

D. Bridges, “Back to the Future: The higher education curriculum in the 21st century,” Cambridge Journal of Education, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 37–55, Mar. 2000, doi: 10.1080/03057640050005762. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640050005762

V. Kumar, “ CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM IN INDIA,” Delhi Business Review, vol. 14, no. 2, Jul. 2013.

Y. A. Sheikh, “Higher Education in India: Challenges and Opportunities ,” Journal of Education and Practice, vol. 8, no. 1, 2017.

A. Gilbert, S. Tait-McCutcheon, and B. Knewstubb, “Innovative teaching in higher education: Teachers’ perceptions of support and constraint,” Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 123–134, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1080/14703297.2020.1715816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1715816

V. Kumar, “ CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM IN INDIA,” Delhi Business Review, vol. 14, no. 2, Jul. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51768/dbr.v14i2.142201313

P. Doolittle, K. Wojdak, and A. Walters, “Defining Active Learning: A Restricted Systemic Review,” Teaching and Learning Inquiry, vol. 11, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.25

D. L. Linton, W. M. Pangle, K. H. Wyatt, K. N. Powell, and R. E. Sherwood, “Identifying Key Features of Effective Active Learning: The Effects of Writing and Peer Discussion,” CBE—Life Sciences Education, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 469–477, Sep. 2014, doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-12-0242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0242

K. A. Nguyen et al., “Instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning: a systematic literature review,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 9, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40594-021-00270-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00270-7

J. P. Bean and B. S. Metzner, “A Conceptual Model of Nontraditional Undergraduate Student Attrition,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 485–540, Dec. 1985, doi: 10.3102/00346543055004485. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543055004485

V. Tinto, Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition (2nd ed.). . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226922461.001.0001

N. A. Bradbury, “Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more?,” Adv. Physiol. Educ., vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 509–513, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1152/advan.00109.2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2016

K. Wilson and J. H. Korn, “Attention During Lectures: Beyond Ten Minutes,” Teaching of Psychology, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 85–89, Jun. 2007, doi: 10.1080/00986280701291291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701291291

J. S. Brown and R. P. Adler, “Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0. ,” EDUCAUSE Review, 43(1), pp. 16–32, 2008.

N. Selwyn, Education and Technology: Key Issues and Debates. (1st ed.). Continuum International Publishing Group, 2012.

L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon, 2001.

G. D. Kuh, “High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter,” 2008.

L. Darling-Hammond, L. Flook, C. Cook-Harvey, B. Barron, and D. Osher, “Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development,” Appl. Dev. Sci., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 97–140, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

J. W. Gikandi, D. Morrow, and N. E. Davis, “Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature,” Comput. Educ., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 2333–2351, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.004

D. L. McCabe, K. D. Butterfield, and L. K. Treviño, Cheating in College: Why Students Do It and What We Can Do About It. . Johns Hopkins University Press., 2012.

W. Sutherland-Smith, Plagiarism, the Internet, and Student Learning. Routledge, 2008. doi: 10.4324/9780203928370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203928370

T. Bretag, “Challenges in Addressing Plagiarism in Education.,” The Journal of Academic Ethics, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 171–192, 2016.

T. Fishman, “Plagiarism in Higher Education: The Role of Student Culture and University Policy.,” Academic Integrity Journal, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 67–85, 2014.

N. Hayes and L. D. Introna, “Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: When plagiarism gets in the way of learning,” Ethics Behav., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 213–231, 2005, doi: 10.1207/S15327019EB1503_2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1503_2

B. E. Whitley, “Factors Associated with Plagiarism Among College Students. Journal of Higher Education,” Journal of Higher Education, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 316–327, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018724900565

R. Paul and L. Elder, Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life. . Pearson, 2006.

R. H. Ennis, “The Nature of Critical Thinking: An Outline of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities i,” Topoi, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 123–136, 2011.

D. F. Halpern, Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking (5th ed.). . Psychology Press., 2014.

J. W. Pellegrino and M. L. Hilton, Education for Life and Work. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2012. doi: 10.17226/13398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/13398