Decoding the Disciplines - User contributions [en]

Step 4: Give Students Practice and Feedback

2026-04-11T17:20:02Z

Joan Middendorf:

Creating opportunities for students to practice essential mental operations and receive feedback is fourth step within the seven steps of Decoding the Disciplines.

To help students overcome most bottlenecks to learning, it is necessary to augment modeling ([http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-3-modeling-mental-operations/ Step 3]) with opportunities for them to practice these steps and to receive feedback on the extent to which they have mastered each. Here are some things to bear in mind when creating occasions for practice:

*This practice can come in a wide variety of forms — brief in-class assignments or Classroom Assessment Techniques, on-line exercises, collaborative tasks, [[discussion techniques]], etc. Just-in-Time Teaching and Team-Based Learning have proven to be particular useful approaches to consider for this step.
*It is important that the exercises initially be focused on a particular mental move that is problematic for many students. Be sure the mental move has been divided into the component bottlenecks. Complex tasks, which require the simultaneous application of multiple skills, can confuse students and do not provide them specific feedback on their mastery of particular operations. Once individual sub-bottlenecks are clearly mastered, then an instructor can give them more complex assignments that allow them to practice the integration of multiple mental moves.
*With challenging operations it may be necessary to give students multiple opportunities for practice in a variety of forms.
*Practice exercises should be arranged in logical order and integrated with modeling, so that the two steps reinforce one another.
*Practice can often be integrated with crucial content from the course, so that the work on skills also increases student understanding of the particular material that is used as examples in the exercise.
*Students should generally receive some form of information about the extent to which they are succeeding at the essential task that they are practicing. This can come in the form of specific comments on their individual attempts to do the tasks that they have been assigned, or the instructor may discuss typical examples of successful or unsuccessful student work using techniques of Just-in-Time teaching.
*Students need to understand the reason for the practice. They should understand that it offers them a chance to find out where they have gained mastery of essential steps and where they still need work with minimal negative impact on their grade.[http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-4-creating-opportunities-for-students-to-practice-essential-mental-operations/

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition or Academic Writing

2026-04-11T17:13:01Z

Joan Middendorf: Credit to collaborating professor

==Description of bottleneck==
Audience awareness is a bottleneck that occurs frequently in writing courses, such as in a composition course or an academic writing course. Below is the bottleneck and lesson to get students to get through the bottleneck. (Jeanne Marie Rose; English Department; Pennsylvania State University Berks)

=== Audience Awareness Bottleneck Lesson ===
1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with '''writing''', which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Prof. Rose selected audience awareness for her most difficult bottleneck in her course.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

==Related scholarly work on this bottleneck==
Downs, Doug, and Liane Robertson. "Threshold concepts in first-year composition." ''Adler-Kassner and Wardle'' (2015): 105-21

==People interested in this bottleneck==
Anyone teaching writing in a course. whether an academic writing course, or a general writing course, might be interested in this bottleneck.

==References==
Hood, L. & Middendorf, J. (submitted) AI as Co-Decoder: Where can AI serve as a conversation partner? ''Transformative Dialogues Teaching and Learning Journal.''
[[Category:Bottleneck]]
[[Category:Composition]]
[[Category:Academic Writing]]
[[Category:Writing across the curriculum]]
[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Bottleneck lesson]]

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition or Academic Writing

2026-04-11T17:06:41Z

Joan Middendorf: Added resources

==Description of bottleneck==
Audience awareness is a bottleneck that occurs frequently in writing courses, such as in a Composition course or an academic writing course. Below is the bottleneck and lesson to get students to get through the bottleneck. (CREDIT TO ?? of Penn State Berks)

=== Audience Awareness Bottleneck Lesson ===
1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with writing, which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Instructor selected the audience awareness for her focus.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

==Related scholarly work on this bottleneck==
Downs, Doug, and Liane Robertson. "Threshold concepts in first-year composition." ''Adler-Kassner and Wardle'' (2015): 105-21

==People interested in this bottleneck==
Anyone teaching writing in a course. whether an academic writing course, or a general writing course, might be interested in this bottleneck.

==References==
Hood, L. & Middendorf, J. (submitted) AI as Co-Decoder: Where can AI serve as a conversation partner? ''Transformative Dialogues Teaching and Learning Journal.''
[[Category:Bottleneck]]
[[Category:Composition]]
[[Category:Academic Writing]]
[[Category:Writing across the curriculum]]
[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Bottleneck lesson]]

Discussion techniques

2026-04-11T17:01:33Z

Joan Middendorf:

=== '''''Discussion Techniques for Active Learning:''''' '''''Dictionary of Methods and Strategies''''' ===
'''Affinity Map:''' Ask an open-ended question that has many possible answers. Have the students write one idea per post-it

note about the question. Instruct students to work silently on their own. Reminding students to remain silent, have them

organize ideas by “natural” categories. Once they have done this ask them to converse about the sorting and come up

with a name for each category. Review and discuss the group categories and use them as a springboard to further deeper

understanding of the topic.

'''Think-Pair-Share:''' After posing a complex question, ask students to respond in writing for 1–2 minutes, depending upon

the complexity of the question. Then ask students to pair up and talk with their neighbor about their response for 1–2

minutes. Finally, ask selected pairs to share their responses with the whole class. This technique improves the quality of

students’ responses to questions by allowing for processing time. The technique also improves the participation of

generally quiet, shy, and unsure students.

Resources: Millis & Cottell, Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty (1998).

'''Partial Problem''': This activity helps students practice parts of problems that typically cause them difficulty. Instructors

can see how well students grasp this part of the problem or whether students need additional instruction. In a problem

requiring several steps, work the problem for the students or with them until a critical point. At that point, stop and ask

what the next step is. Students should be able to identify what must be done and complete the problem. Students only

work the part of the problem that they most need to focus on. The “easy part” is either worked for them or omitted all

together.

Resources: Adapted from Walvoord and Anderson, Effective Grading (1998).

'''Save the Last Word for Me:''' In groups of three or four, each participant silently chooses an idea or passage from a

reading which s/he found to be significant. When the group is ready, a volunteer begins by reading his/her passage but

says nothing about why s/he chose that point. The other two or three participants each have one minute to respond to

that idea. The reader then has three minutes to state why s/he chose that passage and to respond to his/her colleagues’

comments. The same pattern is followed until all members of the group have “had the last word.” The instructor keeps

track of time; talk has to stop when time is called, and if the speaker finished before time is called, the group sits in silence

reflecting. When the process is complete, the instructor debriefs the process, asking, for example, “How did this work for

you?” and “What didn’t work for you?” Debriefing is essential and must not be skipped.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

'''Minute Paper''': Use this method at the start of the class to appraise students’ preparation for the class, or at the end of

class to see how well they understood the day’s topic. Pass out a blank 3x5” or 4x6” index card. Tell students they have

one minute to write a thoughtful but brief response to a question you write on the board or project with the overhead. For

example, “What was the most important thing you learned?” or “What remains unclear to you about today’s lecture?”

Unless you schedule the minute papers in your syllabus, don’t have the students put their names on the cards. The

feedback will be more honest, and the students will not feel intimidated by the unscheduled assessment.

Resources: Angelo & Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques (1993), p. 148.

'''ConcepTest:''' This technique gives faculty members quick feedback in class on students’ understanding of course

concepts. Students answer a multiple choice question posed by the instructor in class. This question focuses on a single

concept, can’t be solved by an equation, and is intermediate in difficulty. Students then raise their hand for their answer

choice. If all students are in agreement, then the instructor knows to move on with the material. If there is disagreement

about the correct responses, the instructor knows to spend more time with the concept. The technique can be followed up

with a think-pair-share in which students talk to their neighbor about why they think the answer they gave is correct. The

instructor can then ask for another show of hands to see how peer instruction changed students’ responses.

Resources: mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?ed=1&rowid=8

'''Pro/Con Grid or Categorizing Grid:''' Have the students create a list of the pros and cons of a particular action or

argument. Alternatively, they could list costs and benefits of a decision, or alternate solutions to a problem. Be sure to tell

them how many pros & cons you want them to devise. Also tell them whether you want a list of words and phrases or if

you want responses in full sentences. This method is useful to judging the depth and breadth of student understanding,

and also their objectivity about the issue at hand.

Resources: Angelo & Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques (1993), p. 168.

'''Fishbowl:''' This discussion technique is useful for having the students summarize a discussion and works well in large

classes. Before the next class discussion, ask a subset of the class (about a third) to be prepared to be in the fishbowl at

the next class where they will actively participate in a discussion. During the discussion, these “fishbowl” students sit in a

circle in the middle of the room. The rest of the students sit in a concentric circle outside the fishbowl looking in at the

discussants; they are observers and note-takers about the discussion. At the end of the discussion, the observers share

their observations and ask questions. Their notes might be provided online to the rest of the class.

Resources: McKeachie, Teaching Tips (1999), p. 211

'''Continuum Dialogue:''' Participants stand physically on an arc according to where each person places themselves

between two statements that form the beginning and end of the continuum. The statements that establish the ends of the

continuum must allow for difference without there being a right and wrong place to stand. When the topics at the two ends

have been established, the facilitator asks people at different points in the continuum why they chose t stand where they

did. Resourcs: Marylyn Wentworth, National School Reform

'''Jigsaw:''' Choose material that can be broken into segments like a research

article. Divide the class into groups equal to the number of segments.

Group 1, in a collaborative study group, learns the material in the first

segment, group 2 studies the second segment, etc. After the study period,

new groups are formed so that each new group contains a member of each

former study group. Each group member now teaches the material they

studied to the other members of the group.

Resources: Silberman, M. (1996) ''Active Learning: 101 Strategies''

''to Teach Any Subject''. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. p. 111

Image:

<nowiki>http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/jigsaw.html</nowiki>

'''Microlab:''' Based on a reading or concept, the instructor prepares at most three questions of increasing complexity or

depth. Students are put into groups of three and are given one to two minutes to think and write about the first question.

Then each person is given a minute (or two minutes if time allows) to talk about his/her response to the question. While

one person is talking, the others are listening. After the time is up, the next person speaks, and so on until all three

members of the group have spoken about the first question. The process is repeated for the follow-up questions. On the

first question, begin with person #1, then #2, then #3. On the second question start with person #2, then #3, then #1. On

the third question, start with person #3, then #1, then #2. The instructor keeps track of time; talk has to stop when time is

called, and if the speaker finished before time is called, the group sits in silence reflecting. When the process is complete,

the instructor debriefs the process, asking, for example, “How did this work for you?” and “What didn’t work for you?”

Debriefing is essential and must not be skipped.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

'''Send-a-Problem:''' Each group member writes a review question on a card. They then take turns asking the group to

solve the question. If there is a consensus on the answer, it is written on the back of the card. After all questions are

answered, the card stack is sent to the next group, who repeats the process without looking at the first group’s answer

until they have reached a consensus. Time required: 2-3 minutes per person for each group that works through the card

stack.

'''Chalk Talk:''' A silent way to reflect, generate ideas, check on learning, develop projects, or solve problems, chalk talk

uses either a chalkboard or a very large sheet of newsprint. The facilitator makes many pieces of chalk or markers

available and explains VERY BRIEFLY that Chalk Talk is a silent activity. (No one may talk at all. Anyone may add to the

chalk talk as they please.) Students can comment on other people’s ideas simply by drawing a connecting line to the

comment. To start the facilitator writes a relevant question in a circle on the board, such as, “What do you know about

Croatia?” or “How shall we proceed?” The facilitator can stand back and let it unfold or expand thinking by circling some

ideas, writing questions about a participant comment, or adding his/her own reflections or ideas.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

Written by Joan Middendorf, Katie Kearns, Eric Metzler (Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, Indiana University)
[[Category:Instructional Techniques]]

Discussion techniques

2026-04-11T17:00:51Z

Joan Middendorf: added author names

Discussion techniques

2026-04-11T16:54:39Z

Joan Middendorf: Changed categories.

Discussion techniques

2026-04-11T16:42:38Z

Joan Middendorf:

Discussion techniques

2026-04-11T16:41:57Z

Joan Middendorf: Added new page on Discussion Techniques

'''''Discussion Techniques for Active Learning:'''''

'''''Dictionary of Methods and Strategies'''''

'''Affinity Map:''' Ask an open-ended question that has many possible answers. Have the students write one idea per post-it

note about the question. Instruct students to work silently on their own. Reminding students to remain silent, have them

organize ideas by “natural” categories. Once they have done this ask them to converse about the sorting and come up

with a name for each category. Review and discuss the group categories and use them as a springboard to further deeper

understanding of the topic.

'''Think-Pair-Share:''' After posing a complex question, ask students to respond in writing for 1–2 minutes, depending upon

the complexity of the question. Then ask students to pair up and talk with their neighbor about their response for 1–2

minutes. Finally, ask selected pairs to share their responses with the whole class. This technique improves the quality of

students’ responses to questions by allowing for processing time. The technique also improves the participation of

generally quiet, shy, and unsure students.

Resources: Millis & Cottell, Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty (1998).

'''Partial Problem''': This activity helps students practice parts of problems that typically cause them difficulty. Instructors

can see how well students grasp this part of the problem or whether students need additional instruction. In a problem

requiring several steps, work the problem for the students or with them until a critical point. At that point, stop and ask

what the next step is. Students should be able to identify what must be done and complete the problem. Students only

work the part of the problem that they most need to focus on. The “easy part” is either worked for them or omitted all

together.

Resources: Adapted from Walvoord and Anderson, Effective Grading (1998).

'''Save the Last Word for Me:''' In groups of three or four, each participant silently chooses an idea or passage from a

reading which s/he found to be significant. When the group is ready, a volunteer begins by reading his/her passage but

says nothing about why s/he chose that point. The other two or three participants each have one minute to respond to

that idea. The reader then has three minutes to state why s/he chose that passage and to respond to his/her colleagues’

comments. The same pattern is followed until all members of the group have “had the last word.” The instructor keeps

track of time; talk has to stop when time is called, and if the speaker finished before time is called, the group sits in silence

reflecting. When the process is complete, the instructor debriefs the process, asking, for example, “How did this work for

you?” and “What didn’t work for you?” Debriefing is essential and must not be skipped.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

'''Minute Paper''': Use this method at the start of the class to appraise students’ preparation for the class, or at the end of

class to see how well they understood the day’s topic. Pass out a blank 3x5” or 4x6” index card. Tell students they have

one minute to write a thoughtful but brief response to a question you write on the board or project with the overhead. For

example, “What was the most important thing you learned?” or “What remains unclear to you about today’s lecture?”

Unless you schedule the minute papers in your syllabus, don’t have the students put their names on the cards. The

feedback will be more honest, and the students will not feel intimidated by the unscheduled assessment.

Resources: Angelo & Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques (1993), p. 148.

'''ConcepTest:''' This technique gives faculty members quick feedback in class on students’ understanding of course

concepts. Students answer a multiple choice question posed by the instructor in class. This question focuses on a single

concept, can’t be solved by an equation, and is intermediate in difficulty. Students then raise their hand for their answer

choice. If all students are in agreement, then the instructor knows to move on with the material. If there is disagreement

about the correct responses, the instructor knows to spend more time with the concept. The technique can be followed up

with a think-pair-share in which students talk to their neighbor about why they think the answer they gave is correct. The

instructor can then ask for another show of hands to see how peer instruction changed students’ responses.

Resources: mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?ed=1&rowid=8

'''Pro/Con Grid or Categorizing Grid:''' Have the students create a list of the pros and cons of a particular action or

argument. Alternatively, they could list costs and benefits of a decision, or alternate solutions to a problem. Be sure to tell

them how many pros & cons you want them to devise. Also tell them whether you want a list of words and phrases or if

you want responses in full sentences. This method is useful to judging the depth and breadth of student understanding,

and also their objectivity about the issue at hand.

Resources: Angelo & Cross, Classroom Assessment Techniques (1993), p. 168.

'''Fishbowl:''' This discussion technique is useful for having the students summarize a discussion and works well in large

classes. Before the next class discussion, ask a subset of the class (about a third) to be prepared to be in the fishbowl at

the next class where they will actively participate in a discussion. During the discussion, these “fishbowl” students sit in a

circle in the middle of the room. The rest of the students sit in a concentric circle outside the fishbowl looking in at the

discussants; they are observers and note-takers about the discussion. At the end of the discussion, the observers share

their observations and ask questions. Their notes might be provided online to the rest of the class.

Resources: McKeachie, Teaching Tips (1999), p. 211

'''Continuum Dialogue:''' Participants stand physically on an arc according to where each person places themselves

between two statements that form the beginning and end of the continuum. The statements that establish the ends of the

continuum must allow for difference without there being a right and wrong place to stand. When the topics at the two ends

have been established, the facilitator asks people at different points in the continuum why they chose t stand where they

did. Resourcs: Marylyn Wentworth, National School Reform

'''Jigsaw:''' Choose material that can be broken into segments like a research

article. Divide the class into groups equal to the number of segments.

Group 1, in a collaborative study group, learns the material in the first

segment, group 2 studies the second segment, etc. After the study period,

new groups are formed so that each new group contains a member of each

former study group. Each group member now teaches the material they

studied to the other members of the group.

Resources: Silberman, M. (1996) ''Active Learning: 101 Strategies''

''to Teach Any Subject''. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. p. 111

Image:

<nowiki>http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/jigsaw.html</nowiki>

'''Microlab:''' Based on a reading or concept, the instructor prepares at most three questions of increasing complexity or

depth. Students are put into groups of three and are given one to two minutes to think and write about the first question.

Then each person is given a minute (or two minutes if time allows) to talk about his/her response to the question. While

one person is talking, the others are listening. After the time is up, the next person speaks, and so on until all three

members of the group have spoken about the first question. The process is repeated for the follow-up questions. On the

first question, begin with person #1, then #2, then #3. On the second question start with person #2, then #3, then #1. On

the third question, start with person #3, then #1, then #2. The instructor keeps track of time; talk has to stop when time is

called, and if the speaker finished before time is called, the group sits in silence reflecting. When the process is complete,

the instructor debriefs the process, asking, for example, “How did this work for you?” and “What didn’t work for you?”

Debriefing is essential and must not be skipped.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

'''Send-a-Problem:''' Each group member writes a review question on a card. They then take turns asking the group to

solve the question. If there is a consensus on the answer, it is written on the back of the card. After all questions are

answered, the card stack is sent to the next group, who repeats the process without looking at the first group’s answer

until they have reached a consensus. Time required: 2-3 minutes per person for each group that works through the card

stack.

'''Chalk Talk:''' A silent way to reflect, generate ideas, check on learning, develop projects, or solve problems, chalk talk

uses either a chalkboard or a very large sheet of newsprint. The facilitator makes many pieces of chalk or markers

available and explains VERY BRIEFLY that Chalk Talk is a silent activity. (No one may talk at all. Anyone may add to the

chalk talk as they please.) Students can comment on other people’s ideas simply by drawing a connecting line to the

comment. To start the facilitator writes a relevant question in a circle on the board, such as, “What do you know about

Croatia?” or “How shall we proceed?” The facilitator can stand back and let it unfold or expand thinking by circling some

ideas, writing questions about a participant comment, or adding his/her own reflections or ideas.

Resources: www.Nsrfharmony.org

Step 4: Give Students Practice and Feedback

2026-04-11T16:39:31Z

Joan Middendorf: Adding link

Creating opportunities for students to practice essential mental operations and receive feedback is fourth step within the seven steps of Decoding the Disciplines.

To help students overcome most bottlenecks to learning, it is necessary to augment modeling ([http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-3-modeling-mental-operations/ Step 3]) with opportunities for them to practice these steps and to receive feedback on the extent to which they have mastered each. Here are some things to bear in mind when creating occasions for practice:

*This practice can come in a wide variety of forms — brief in-class assignments or Classroom Assessment Techniques, on-line exercises, collaborative tasks, [[discussion techniques]], etc. Just-in-Time Teaching and Team-Based Learning have proven to be particular useful approaches to consider for this step.
*It is important that the exercises initially be focused on a particular mental operation that is problematic for many students. Complex tasks, which require the simultaneous application of multiple skills, can confuse students and do not provide them specific feedback on their mastery of particular operations. Once individual skills are clearly mastered, then an instructor can give them more complex assignments that allow them to practice the integration of multiple operations.
*With challenging operations it may be necessary to give students multiple opportunities for practice in a variety of forms.
*Practice exercises should be arranged in logical order and integrated with modeling, so that the two steps reinforce one another.
*Practice can often be integrated with crucial content from the course, so that the work on skills also increases student understanding of the particular material that is used as examples in the exercise.
*Students should generally receive some form of information about the extent to which they are succeeding at the essential task that they are practicing. This can come in the form of specific comments on their individual attempts to do the tasks that they have been assigned, or the instructor may discuss typical examples of successful or unsuccessful student work using techniques of Just-in-Time teaching.
*Students need to understand the reason for the practice. They should understand that it offers them a chance to find out where they have gained mastery of essential steps and where they still need work with minimal negative impact on their grade.[http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-4-creating-opportunities-for-students-to-practice-essential-mental-operations/

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition or Academic Writing

2026-04-11T16:26:22Z

Joan Middendorf: Changed categories.

==Description of bottleneck==
Audience awareness is a bottleneck that occurs frequently in writing courses, such as in a Composition course or an academic writing course. Below is the bottleneck and lesson to get students to get through the bottleneck. (CREDIT TO ?? of Penn State Berks)

=== Audience Awareness Bottleneck Lesson ===
1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with writing, which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Instructor selected the audience awareness for her focus.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

==Related scholarly work on this bottleneck==

==People interested in this bottleneck==
Anyone teaching writing in a course. whether an academic writing course, or a general writing course, might be interested in this bottleneck.

==References==

[[Category:Bottleneck]]
[[Category:Composition]]
[[Category:Academic Writing]]
[[Category:Writing across the curriculum]]
[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Bottleneck lesson]]

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition or Academic Writing

2026-04-11T16:25:26Z

Joan Middendorf: Changed categories.

==Description of bottleneck==
Audience awareness is a bottleneck that occurs frequently in writing courses, such as in a Composition course or an academic writing course. Below is the bottleneck and lesson to get students to get through the bottleneck. (CREDIT TO ?? of Penn State Berks)

=== Audience Awareness Bottleneck Lesson ===
1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with writing, which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Instructor selected the audience awareness for her focus.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

==Related scholarly work on this bottleneck==

==People interested in this bottleneck==
Anyone teaching writing in a course. whether an academic writing course, or a general writing course, might be interested in this bottleneck.

==References==

[[Category:Bottleneck]]
[[Category:Composition]]
[[Category:Academic Writing]]
[[Category:Writing across the curriculum]]
[[Category:English]]

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition or Academic Writing

2026-04-11T16:23:17Z

Joan Middendorf: new page

==Description of bottleneck==
Audience awareness is a bottleneck that occurs frequently in writing courses, such as in a Composition course or an academic writing course. Below is the bottleneck and lesson to get students to get through the bottleneck. (CREDIT TO ?? of Penn State Berks)

=== Audience Awareness Bottleneck Lesson ===
1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with writing, which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Instructor selected the audience awareness for her focus.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

==Related scholarly work on this bottleneck==

==People interested in this bottleneck==
Anyone teaching writing in a course. whether an academic writing course, or a general writing course, might be interested in this bottleneck.

==References==

[[Category:Bottleneck]]

Category:Bottleneck

2026-04-10T20:33:59Z

Joan Middendorf: I can't seem to place this bottleneck and lesson in the correct location--within the long collection of bottlenecks?!

Category:Bottleneck

2026-04-10T20:30:48Z

Joan Middendorf: Added a new bottleneck and lesson

Composition-Bottleneck lesson on Audience Awareness in Writing Composition

1. Identify a bottleneck: Students struggle with writing, which involves a variety of sub-bottlenecks: Putting ideas into words; audience awareness; rewriting and editing; sense of not being a good writer; syntax and grammar. Instructor selected the audience awareness for her focus.

2.Decode the mental move for audience awareness: Being able to imagine an audience, put yourself in their place, anticipate their needs, then meet those needs.

3. Model with analogy: Imagining yourself as a tour guide for your audience, leading them through an unfamiliar landscape of ideas and pointing out familiar landmarks to help them navigate.

4. Practice: Answer audience awareness Qs prior to writing assignments: Who are your readers? What do they know? What do they value? What do they need from your writing?

5. Motivate: Keep a specific reader in mind. Realizing that someone will read their writing, whether it is the instructor or peers, or other readers, encourages student writers to craft their work more thoughtfully and persist through challenges.

6. Assess: Documented Problem Solution—Answer questions in 1st column; reflect on those answers in 2nd column for insights gained.

7. Share: Coordinate with colleagues who teach the same course and face the same bottleneck so they, too, can avoid it by Decoding audience awareness.

Pages needed

2026-04-10T20:20:43Z

Joan Middendorf:

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|done
|-
|<s>Alternative Decoding techniques</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc</s>
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks (such as cognitive, emotional)
|Examples introduced for cognitive and emotional bottlenecks (Inna)
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|<s>Transformative Dialogues</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.</s>
|Added 3 sentences @ TD
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
Shibhan
Michelle
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|ready for feedback
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace, Inna, Siobhán
|
|
|-
|[[Materials to introduce Decoding]]
|Peter Riegler
|page where people can share their intro materials to Decoding
- synopsis page linking to materials(e.g. ppt by high school teachers)
- section on how to add material
|
|-
|[[identity bottleneck]]
|Michelle, Siobhán, Maire
|name to be discussed
|
|-
|How to prepare for an interview (for the interviewer)
|Maire
|
|
|-
|Relationality of Decoding
|Peter R., Michelle
|
|
|-
|What is essential for Decoding
|Danielle
|
|
|-
|Relation between Decoding and SoTL
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>Decoding is more inductive</s>
<s>SoTL tends to be deductive</s>
|<s>Done -at least a simple beginning</s>
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed (automatically reported by the system).

Category:Biology: Visualizing Biological Mechanisms

2025-12-29T23:05:52Z

Joan Middendorf: I pointed to an example of a biology lesson plan.

"Visualizing a three-dimensional process such as translation of RNA is difficult, and if you cannot visualize it, you cannot make predictions."
From "Visualizing Biology" Lesson Plan by Mimi Zolan in Appendix A pp 198-200. In Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2018). Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline. Stylus.

Pages needed

2025-07-24T17:28:59Z

Joan Middendorf: completed a row

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|done
|-
|<s>Alternative Decoding techniques</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc</s>
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks (such as cognitive, emotional)
|Examples introduced for cognitive and emotional bottlenecks (Inna)
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|<s>Transformative Dialogues</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.</s>
|Added 3 sentences @ TD
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
Shibhan
Michelle
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|ready for feedback
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace, Inna, Siobhán
|
|
|-
|[[Materials to introduce Decoding]]
|Peter Riegler
|page where people can share their intro materials to Decoding
- synopsis page linking to materials(e.g. ppt by high school teachers)
- section on how to add material
|
|-
|[[identity bottleneck]]
|Michelle, Siobhán, Maire
|name to be discussed
|
|-
|How to prepare for an interview (for the interviewer)
|Maire
|
|
|-
|Relationality of Decoding
|Peter R., Michelle
|
|
|-
|What is essential for Decoding
|Danielle
|
|
|-
|Relation between Decoding and SoTL
|Joan Middendorf
|Decoding is more inductive
SoTL tends to be deductive
|Done -at least a simple beginning
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed (automatically reported by the system).

Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process

2025-07-24T17:25:54Z

Joan Middendorf:

'''Sharing''' what has been learned through the Decoding process is the last step within the seven steps of [[Decoding the Disciplines]].

In earlier stages of the development of Decoding sharing was seen as the culmination of the process. After one had completed a cycle from identifying a bottleneck to assessing the extent to which the modeling and practice had been effective, it was time to make available what had been learned and to receive feedback from other scholars of teaching and learning. This could take the form of simple conversations with colleagues. But the systematic nature of the exploration of a learning issue and the assessment of the results also provided the basis for formal conference presentations or publications.<ref>http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-7-sharing-what-has-been-learning-through-the-decoding-process/</ref>

==Ways of sharing==
One might immediately think of publishing in SoTL when it comes to sharing Decoding results. Sharing, however, is not restricted to that. Furtherer possible outlets are:

* posters
*videos
*this [[Main Page|wiki]]
*conversation with colleagues
*talk at meeting
*[[Faculty development|faculty learning communities]]

== Decoding and SoTL ==
Decoding the Disciplines is one of the core theories in SoTL and can serve as a bridge between theory and practice for SoTL practitioners (Cruz & Middendorf, 2025). Decoding help instructors/researchers avoid inappropriate research methodologies through focused assessments based on specific student learning bottlenecks. Early on in the development of Decoding, Middendorf and Pace noticed that if instructors wrote up their completed bottleneck lessons, they were doing SoTL, and (to our surprise!) could present and publish with ease (Middendorf & Pace, 2008). Decoding can act as a form of inquiry with the Decoding Steps used as a series of questions and answers that guide a SoTL study.

Elliott & Middendorf (2025) provide examples; they describe a SoTL study in psychological statistics that used every step of the Decoding methodology and contrast that to Decoding studies that focus on only one step of Decoding (a bottleneck, practice, motivation, etc). They also give examples of SoTL studies where Decoding was used as explanatory analyses of complementary theories.

While there are many differences between Decoding and SoTL, one is that Decoding tends to be more inductive, while SoTL tends to be more deductive (depending on the study).

== Ethical considerations ==
Ethical approvement might be needed to do an publish research on [[Decoding the Disciplines|Decoding the Disciplines.]]

== References ==
<references />Cruz, L. & Middendorf, J., (2025). Embedding ''Decoding'' theory in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL): A translational theory to practice, practice to theory bridge. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 18:.

Elliott, L., & Middendorf, J. (2025). Applying ''Decoding'' Methodology to Psychological Statistics and Other Applications. Die-hochschullehre.de. https://www.wbv.de/shop/Applying-Decoding-Methodology-to-Psychological-Statistics-and-Other-Applications-HSL2540W

Middendorf, J., & Pace, D. (2008). Easing Entry into the scholarship of teaching and learning through focused assessments: The “Decoding the Disciplines” Approach. ''To Improve the Academy'', ''26''(1), 53-67.

Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process

2025-07-24T17:24:26Z

Joan Middendorf:

'''Sharing''' what has been learned through the Decoding process is the last step within the seven steps of [[Decoding the Disciplines]].

In earlier stages of the development of Decoding sharing was seen as the culmination of the process. After one had completed a cycle from identifying a bottleneck to assessing the extent to which the modeling and practice had been effective, it was time to make available what had been learned and to receive feedback from other scholars of teaching and learning. This could take the form of simple conversations with colleagues. But the systematic nature of the exploration of a learning issue and the assessment of the results also provided the basis for formal conference presentations or publications.<ref>http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-7-sharing-what-has-been-learning-through-the-decoding-process/</ref>

==Ways of sharing==
One might immediately think of publishing in SoTL when it comes to sharing Decoding results. Sharing, however, is not restricted to that. Furtherer possible outlets are:

* posters
*videos
*this [[Main Page|wiki]]
*conversation with colleagues
*talk at meeting
*[[Faculty development|faculty learning communities]]

== Decoding and SoTL ==
Decoding the Disciplines is one of the core theories in SoTL and can serve as a bridge between theory and practice for SoTL practitioners (Cruz & Middendorf, 2025). Decoding help instructors/researchers avoid inappropriate research methodologies through focused assessments based on specific student learning bottlenecks. Early on in the development of Decoding, Middendorf and Pace noticed that if instructors wrote up their completed bottleneck lessons, they were doing SoTL, and (to our surprise!) could present and publish with ease

(Middendorf & Pace, 2008). Decoding can act as a form of inquiry with the Decoding Steps used as a series of questions and answers that guide a SoTL study.

Elliott & Middendorf (2025) provide examples; they describe a SoTL study in psychological statistics that used every step of the Decoding methodology and contrast that to Decoding studies that focus on only one step of Decoding (a bottleneck, practice, motivation, etc). They also give examples of SoTL studies where Decoding was used as explanatory analyses of complementary theories.

While there are many differences between Decoding and SoTL, one is that Decoding tends to be more inductive, while SoTL tends to be more deductive (depending on the study).

== Ethical considerations ==
Ethical approvement might be needed to do an publish research on [[Decoding the Disciplines|Decoding the Disciplines.]]

== References ==
<references />Cruz, L. & Middendorf, J., (2025). Embedding ''Decoding'' theory in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL): A translational theory to practice, practice to theory bridge. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 18:.

Elliott, L., & Middendorf, J. (2025). Applying ''Decoding'' Methodology to Psychological Statistics and Other Applications. Die-hochschullehre.de. https://www.wbv.de/shop/Applying-Decoding-Methodology-to-Psychological-Statistics-and-Other-Applications-HSL2540W

Middendorf, J., & Pace, D. (2008). Easing Entry into the scholarship of teaching and learning through focused assessments: The “Decoding the Disciplines” Approach. ''To Improve the Academy'', ''26''(1), 53-67.

Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process

2025-07-24T17:23:37Z

Joan Middendorf: Added section on Decoding and SoTL

'''Sharing''' what has been learned through the Decoding process is the last step within the seven steps of [[Decoding the Disciplines]].

In earlier stages of the development of Decoding sharing was seen as the culmination of the process. After one had completed a cycle from identifying a bottleneck to assessing the extent to which the modeling and practice had been effective, it was time to make available what had been learned and to receive feedback from other scholars of teaching and learning. This could take the form of simple conversations with colleagues. But the systematic nature of the exploration of a learning issue and the assessment of the results also provided the basis for formal conference presentations or publications.<ref>http://decodingthedisciplines.org/step-7-sharing-what-has-been-learning-through-the-decoding-process/</ref>

==Ways of sharing==
One might immediately think of publishing in SoTL when it comes to sharing Decoding results. Sharing, however, is not restricted to that. Furtherer possible outlets are:

* posters
*videos
*this [[Main Page|wiki]]
*conversation with colleagues
*talk at meeting
*[[Faculty development|faculty learning communities]]
Decoding and SoTL

Decoding the Disciplines is one of the core theories in SoTL and can serve as a bridge between theory and practice for SoTL practitioners (Cruz & Middendorf, 2025). Decoding help instructors/researchers avoid inappropriate research methodologies through focused assessments based on specific student learning bottlenecks. Early on in the development of Decoding, Middendorf and Pace noticed that if instructors wrote up their completed bottleneck lessons, they were doing SoTL, and (to our surprise!) could present and publish with ease

(Middendorf & Pace, 2008). Decoding can act as a form of inquiry with the Decoding Steps used as a series of questions and answers that guide a SoTL study.

Elliott & Middendorf (2025) provide examples; they describe a SoTL study in psychological statistics that used every step of the Decoding methodology and contrast that to Decoding studies that focus on only one step of Decoding (a bottleneck, practice, motivation, etc). They also give examples of SoTL studies where Decoding was used as explanatory analyses of complementary theories.

While there are many differences between Decoding and SoTL, one is that Decoding tends to be more inductive, while SoTL tends to be more deductive (depending on the study).

== Ethical considerations ==
Ethical approvement might be needed to do an publish research on [[Decoding the Disciplines|Decoding the Disciplines.]]

== References ==
<references />Cruz, L. & Middendorf, J., (2025). Embedding ''Decoding'' theory in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL): A translational theory to practice, practice to theory bridge. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 18:.

Elliott, L., & Middendorf, J. (2025). Applying ''Decoding'' Methodology to Psychological Statistics and Other Applications. Die-hochschullehre.de. https://www.wbv.de/shop/Applying-Decoding-Methodology-to-Psychological-Statistics-and-Other-Applications-HSL2540W

Middendorf, J., & Pace, D. (2008). Easing Entry into the scholarship of teaching and learning through focused assessments: The “Decoding the Disciplines” Approach. ''To Improve the Academy'', ''26''(1), 53-67.

Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process

2025-06-20T10:58:12Z

Joan Middendorf: title

Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process

2025-06-20T10:51:38Z

Joan Middendorf: pointing to SoTL

How to Prepare for an Interview

2025-06-17T14:16:52Z

Joan Middendorf: Describe how a Decoding interview is different

=== Explain to the interviewee - ===
This will be unlike a usual interview because we’ll know we’re being successful when we get to the place where you can’t answer the questions. We’re trying to uncover your tacit knowledge, your reasoning that isn’t readily available to you. When you begin to hesitate to answer, we will probe where that happens, and we take it as a good sign.

Pages needed

2025-06-17T10:45:59Z

Joan Middendorf:

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|done
|-
|<s>Alternative Decoding techniques</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc</s>
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks (such as cognitive, emotional)
|Examples introduced for cognitive and emotional bottlenecks (Inna)
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|<s>Transformative Dialogues</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.</s>
|Added 3 sentences @ TD
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|-
|[[Materials to introduce Decoding]]
|Peter Riegler
|page where people can share their intro materials to Decoding
- synopsis page linking to materials(e.g. ppt by high school teachers)
- section on how to add material
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Transformative dialogues

2025-06-17T10:44:03Z

Joan Middendorf:

[https://journals.psu.edu/td Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal] will publish a recurring Decoding and Disrupting volume (once annually). Transformational Dialogues is an International, open-access, peer-reviewed journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning hosted at Pennsylvania State University. Joan Middendorf is editor of the Decoding and Disrupting volume, with Kevin Guidry as Managing Editor.

Transformative dialogues

2025-06-17T10:40:05Z

Joan Middendorf: Added page

[https://journals.psu.edu/td Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal] is an International, open-access, peer-reviewed journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning hosted at Pennsylvania State University. Transformational Dialogues is sponsoring a recurring Decoding and Disrupting volume (once annually). Joan Middendorf is editor of the Decoding and Disrupting volume, with Kevin Guidry as Managing Editor.

Pages needed

2025-06-17T10:28:35Z

Joan Middendorf:

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|done
|-
|<s>Alternative Decoding techniques</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc</s>
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks (such as cognitive, emotional)
|Examples introduced for cognitive and emotional bottlenecks (Inna)
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|Transformative Dialogues
|Joan Middendorf
|describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.
|
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|-
|[[Materials to introduce Decoding]]
|Peter Riegler
|page where people can share their intro materials to Decoding
- synopsis page linking to materials(e.g. ppt by high school teachers)
- section on how to add material
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Pages needed

2025-06-17T10:27:59Z

Joan Middendorf:

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|done
|-
|<s>Alternative Decoding techniques</s>
|<s>Joan Middendorf</s>
|<s>analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc</s>
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks (such as cognitive, emotional)
|Examples introduced for cognitive and emotional bottlenecks (Inna)
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|Transformative Dialogues
|
|describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.
|
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|-
|[[Materials to introduce Decoding]]
|Peter Riegler
|page where people can share their intro materials to Decoding
- synopsis page linking to materials(e.g. ppt by high school teachers)
- section on how to add material
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Decoding the Disciplines

2025-06-17T10:22:20Z

Joan Middendorf: Edited the Evolution of Decoding section under History; added paragraph about Disciplines

'''Decoding the Disciplines''' is a process for increasing student learning by narrowing the gap between expert and novice thinking. Beginning with the identification of [[Bottleneck|bottlenecks]] to learning in particular disciplines, it seeks to make explicit the [[wikipedia:Tacit_knowledge|tacit knowledge]] of experts and to help students master the [[Mental action|mental actions]] they need for success in particular courses.[[File:DecodingWheel.png|thumb|The [[Decoding Wheel]] is a visualization of the seven steps of Decoding the Disciplines]]
==Guiding questions in the Decoding process==
The Decoding process is structured by seven questions.<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J.; Pace, D. (2004): [[Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking|Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking]]. New directions for teaching and learning, 2004(98), 1 – 12.</ref><ref>Middendorf, J.; Shopkow, L. (2018): [[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks]]. Sterling: Stylus</ref><ref>Pace, D. (2017): [[The Decoding the Disciplines Paradigm: Seven Steps to Increased Student Learning]]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press</ref> In the Decoding literature these questions usually are referred to as steps. The order of the steps is not mandatory and can be changed as needed.
===[[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Question 1: Where does the student experience a bottleneck to learning?]]===
Answering this question is usually the starting point of the Decoding process. Instructors identify an activity or task in their course that students are supposed to learn but often fail. The activity may well be a mental activity.

===[[Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves|Question 2: What does the specialist do to get past the bottleneck?]]===
This question leads to a key activity of the Decoding process: Instructors explore in depths the steps that disciplinary experts go through to accomplish the activity or task identified as a bottleneck. This exploration is often carried out via a [[Decoding interview]] with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

There are a number of [[Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves|alternative ways to “''Decode''”]] the mental move of the specialist besides the interview, “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck writing tour, concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few. All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline
===[[Step 3 - Modeling Mental Operations|Question 3: How can I show students what they have to do?]]===
A way for instructors to do this is by modeling or demonstrating how they accomplish these activities as an expert. In order to do so, instructors may

*Introduce the mental move through analogies, metaphors, or narratives.
*perform the (mental) steps in front of your students using a subject-specific example.
*explicitly highlight critical operations.

===[[Step 4: Give Students Practice and Feedback|Question 4: How can I give my students practice and feedback?]]===
Often instructors provide their students with tasks or learning activities that allow students to perform the activity identified as a bottleneck and receive feedback.

===[[Step 5 - Motivate and lessen resistance|Question 5: How can I deal with emotional bottlenecks to learning?]]===
The Decoding the Disciplines process can lead to considerable changes in teaching. Students might resist such changes. These resistances can be viewed as a further kind of bottleneck which is [[Emotional Bottleneck|emotional]] rather than [[Cognitive Bottleneck|cognitive]]. Instructors are encouraged to anticipate such resistances in order to better cope with them.

===[[Step 6 - Assess Student Mastery|Question 6: How can I know if my students have mastered these operations?]]===
In order to find out, instructors give assessments that provide information on the degree to which students can perform the activity identified as a bottleneck.

===[[Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process|Question 7: How can I share this process with others?]]===
Instructors may share their findings informally with colleagues or more formally through publications or presentations as a form of [[wikipedia:Scholarship_of_teaching_and_learning|Scholarship of Teaching and Learning]]. As of 2024 instructors and researchers have published more than 150 articles on Decoding.<ref>[http://decodingthedisciplines.org/bibliography/ Bibliography of Decoding Work]</ref>

==History==
Decoding the Disciplines has been pioneered by [[Joan Middendorf]] and [[David Pace]] at Indiana University. David Pace has summarized intentions and goals of this early phase of Decoding the Disciplines as follows:<ref>Pace, D. (2021). [[Beyond Decoding the Disciplines 1.0: New Directions for the Paradigm|Beyond Decoding the Disciplines 1.0: New directions for the paradigm]]. ''Teaching and Learning Inquiry'', ''9''(2). </ref><blockquote>The Decoding the Disciplines approach emerged from a desire to develop new responses to common blocks to learning in college courses. As directors of the Indiana University Freshman Learning Project from 1998 to 2010, Joan Middendorf and David Pace perceived a mismatch between what was being taught to students in many classes and what was actually required for success in these courses. The very expertise of college instructors had made many essential procedures of the disciplines so automatic that these had become invisible and, thus, were not being taught. Students, trying to respond to the demands of their courses, were often unintentionally given conceptual maps of the field that lacked instructions for surmounting crucial challenges. It was as if their instructors had provided their students with the kind of itinerary produced by Google Maps, but had inadvertently omitted many lines of the instructions. Students who were already familiar with the territory found their way with little difficulty. A few students with usual skills at pathfinding turned the limited set of clues at their disposal into a strategy for reaching the destination. But others, who were not pre-educated in the field or endowed with a special predisposition for the discipline, became hopelessly lost.</blockquote>

=== The Evolution of Decoding ===
Excerpted from Middendorf, J. (2025). [[The Theory Bottleneck and Decoding the Disciplines|The Theory Bottleneck and ''Decoding the Disciplines'']]. ''Didaktikzentrum, pp. 5-6.''<blockquote>''Decoding the Disciplines'' did not spring from whole cloth but evolved over several years from a framework to a model to a theory. It was born in 1996, when the Vice Chancellor of Indiana University Bloomington invited [Joan] to form a team for an eight-day leadership institute facilitated by Pat Hutchings (Hutchings, Sciame-Giesecke, & Bender; 1996<ref>Hutchings, P., Sciame-Giesecke, S., & Bender, E., (1996). IU Summer Leadership Institute.</ref>). Teams from all eight Indiana University campuses were tasked with creating new programs to enhance teaching. One of the professors I invited to join the Bloomington team was David Pace. The Bloomington team’s idea was to bring together instructors of large gateway courses and place them in conversation with the literature on teaching and learning in a two-week, cross-disciplinary summer seminar, entitled “The Freshman Learning Project” (FLP). Upon the FLP’s inception, we immediately encountered a problem: With thousands of teaching methods to choose from, but no organizing theory, it was as though we had available to us both everything and nothing.

After learning of the bottleneck idea (Anderson, 1996)<ref>Anderson, J. A. (1996, October). ''Merging Teaching Effectiveness, Learning Outcomes, and Curricular Change with the Diverse Student Needs of the 21st Century'' [Keynote Presentation]. Professional and Organizational Development Network Conference, Salt Lake City, UT.</ref>, we worked it into the second FLP seminar. Bottlenecks did not offer a solution to our too-many-methods problem; nevertheless, it gave us the first step of our framework and afforded each instructor autonomy in choosing a focus for their efforts. Those familiar with David Pace and me know that each of us is inherently disinclined to abandon learners or instructors stuck in the bottleneck. Together with the FLP participants, we began experimenting with ways to get ''through'' the bottlenecks.

Some of the experiments turned out better than others. For example, we challenged one of the deans, an administrator and project funder, to re-experience novice learning. After a one hour knitting lesson, he demanded that we “NEVER DO THAT TO ANOTHER PROFESSOR AGAIN!” In our next experiment, we interviewed a religious studies professor and dean, inviting him to pick something that his students struggled with in class. It turned out that his students were not reading in the ways he wanted. His course used different kinds of texts, requiring four kinds of reading: skimming for popular fiction; close readings for translated Biblical texts; analyses for research articles; and positionality for author identity. He realized he had never explained the differences in reading approaches. This experiment resulted in our first ''Decoding'' interview. These two administrators became key boosters of the FLP and funders of the change we were bringing to campus (Middendorf, 2001)<ref>Middendorf, J. (2001). Getting administrative support for your project. ''To Improve the Academy'', ''19''(1), 346-359. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/tia.17063888.0019.023</ref>.

With their ongoing support, we led the seminar for eleven consecutive years, which allowed for continual refinement of the ''Decoding'' framework. In collaboration with instructors and other partners over the early years of the summer FLP seminar, we refined activities into a model and eventually a theory. In 2004 we presented at the first ISSOTL conference and published our model (Middendorf & Pace, 2004<ref name=":0" />), editing the volume that featured the ways instructors from various field applied ''Decoding'', evidence that the sharing Step (Step 7), which we deliberately designed to encourage analysis and inquiry in SoTL, worked. With ''Decoding the Disciplines,'' we had found an elegant structure to guide our work, a framework that filled a gap in theory, and a model for lesson design.

Further, ''Decoding'' has been enriched and transformed by ''Disrupting the Disciplines'' (Lindstrom, Easton, Yeo, & Attas, 2022)<ref>Lindstrom, G., Easton, L., Yeo, M., & Attas, R. (2022). The disrupting interview: a framework to approach decolonization. ''International Journal for Academic Development'', 1-13, [https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2022.2103560 10.1080/1360144X.2022.2103560].</ref>, with its focus on the heretofore hidden or avoided bottlenecks of colonialism, racism, identity, implicit bias, and related antiracist pedagogies."</blockquote>'''Taking the Disciplines Seriously'''

With the formation the History Learning Project, with Arlene Diaz and Leah Shopkow of IU's history department, we continued our classroom experiments with Decoding and were able to better articulate our understanding of the disciplines: <blockquote>We would define disciplines, then, as epistemic communities, communities of knowing, that produce knowledge through certain tacitly agreed-upon rules governing mental moves. We expect our students to be able to make the moves of the disciplines in our classrooms and to understand the rules…. However, they tend to organize their courses around specific contents rather than around the mental moves they want students to make…. These moves are usually unarticulated within a discipline and may even be so completely internalized by practitioners that they are not aware of them. Not surprisingly, instructors do not teach these moves explicitly, and students, who have experienced many years of schooling in which they were not instructed in disciplinary modes of thought, may not even realize that particular kinds of thinking are called for in a discipline.” - Excerpted from Middendorf & Shopkow, Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks, p. 2).</blockquote>

==Decoding the Disciplines as a framework==
Decoding is highly integrated and integrative. It combines elements of research on expertise and misconceptions, of professional development, of coaching, of collegial counseling, and of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning into a process of teaching development, which acknowledges the difficulties students have in learning subject-specific patterns of thought and action as inherent to processes of teaching and learning. Decoding focuses on the difficulty of the subject matter in a systemic way. It avoids infertile thinking that seeks the failure of teaching primarily among students, or in a wrong selection of teaching method.

==References==
<references />

Decoding the Disciplines

2025-06-17T09:53:01Z

Joan Middendorf: Added Evolution of Decoding

'''Decoding the Disciplines''' is a process for increasing student learning by narrowing the gap between expert and novice thinking. Beginning with the identification of [[Bottleneck|bottlenecks]] to learning in particular disciplines, it seeks to make explicit the [[wikipedia:Tacit_knowledge|tacit knowledge]] of experts and to help students master the [[Mental action|mental actions]] they need for success in particular courses.[[File:DecodingWheel.png|thumb|The [[Decoding Wheel]] is a visualization of the seven steps of Decoding the Disciplines]]
==Guiding questions in the Decoding process==
The Decoding process is structured by seven questions.<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J.; Pace, D. (2004): [[Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking|Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking]]. New directions for teaching and learning, 2004(98), 1 – 12.</ref><ref>Middendorf, J.; Shopkow, L. (2018): [[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks]]. Sterling: Stylus</ref><ref>Pace, D. (2017): [[The Decoding the Disciplines Paradigm: Seven Steps to Increased Student Learning]]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press</ref> In the Decoding literature these questions usually are referred to as steps. The order of the steps is not mandatory and can be changed as needed.
===[[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Question 1: Where does the student experience a bottleneck to learning?]]===
Answering this question is usually the starting point of the Decoding process. Instructors identify an activity or task in their course that students are supposed to learn but often fail. The activity may well be a mental activity.

===[[Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves|Question 2: What does the specialist do to get past the bottleneck?]]===
This question leads to a key activity of the Decoding process: Instructors explore in depths the steps that disciplinary experts go through to accomplish the activity or task identified as a bottleneck. This exploration is often carried out via a [[Decoding interview]] with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

There are a number of [[Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves|alternative ways to “''Decode''”]] the mental move of the specialist besides the interview, “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck writing tour, concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few. All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline
===[[Step 3 - Modeling Mental Operations|Question 3: How can I show students what they have to do?]]===
A way for instructors to do this is by modeling or demonstrating how they accomplish these activities as an expert. In order to do so, instructors may

*Introduce the mental move through analogies, metaphors, or narratives.
*perform the (mental) steps in front of your students using a subject-specific example.
*explicitly highlight critical operations.

===[[Step 4: Give Students Practice and Feedback|Question 4: How can I give my students practice and feedback?]]===
Often instructors provide their students with tasks or learning activities that allow students to perform the activity identified as a bottleneck and receive feedback.

===[[Step 5 - Motivate and lessen resistance|Question 5: How can I deal with emotional bottlenecks to learning?]]===
The Decoding the Disciplines process can lead to considerable changes in teaching. Students might resist such changes. These resistances can be viewed as a further kind of bottleneck which is [[Emotional Bottleneck|emotional]] rather than [[Cognitive Bottleneck|cognitive]]. Instructors are encouraged to anticipate such resistances in order to better cope with them.

===[[Step 6 - Assess Student Mastery|Question 6: How can I know if my students have mastered these operations?]]===
In order to find out, instructors give assessments that provide information on the degree to which students can perform the activity identified as a bottleneck.

===[[Step 7 - Share What Has Been Learned Through the Decoding Process|Question 7: How can I share this process with others?]]===
Instructors may share their findings informally with colleagues or more formally through publications or presentations as a form of [[wikipedia:Scholarship_of_teaching_and_learning|Scholarship of Teaching and Learning]]. As of 2024 instructors and researchers have published more than 150 articles on Decoding.<ref>[http://decodingthedisciplines.org/bibliography/ Bibliography of Decoding Work]</ref>

==History==
Decoding the Disciplines has been pioneered by [[Joan Middendorf]] and [[David Pace]] at Indiana University. David Pace has summarized intentions and goals of this early phase of Decoding the Disciplines as follows:<ref>Pace, D. (2021). [[Beyond Decoding the Disciplines 1.0: New Directions for the Paradigm|Beyond Decoding the Disciplines 1.0: New directions for the paradigm]]. ''Teaching and Learning Inquiry'', ''9''(2). </ref><blockquote>The Decoding the Disciplines approach emerged from a desire to develop new responses to common blocks to learning in college courses. As directors of the Indiana University Freshman Learning Project from 1998 to 2010, Joan Middendorf and David Pace perceived a mismatch between what was being taught to students in many classes and what was actually required for success in these courses. The very expertise of college instructors had made many essential procedures of the disciplines so automatic that these had become invisible and, thus, were not being taught. Students, trying to respond to the demands of their courses, were often unintentionally given conceptual maps of the field that lacked instructions for surmounting crucial challenges. It was as if their instructors had provided their students with the kind of itinerary produced by Google Maps, but had inadvertently omitted many lines of the instructions. Students who were already familiar with the territory found their way with little difficulty. A few students with usual skills at pathfinding turned the limited set of clues at their disposal into a strategy for reaching the destination. But others, who were not pre-educated in the field or endowed with a special predisposition for the discipline, became hopelessly lost.</blockquote>

=== The Evolution of Decoding ===
Excerpted from Middendorf, J. (2025). [[The Theory Bottleneck and Decoding the Disciplines|The Theory Bottleneck and ''Decoding the Disciplines'']]. ''Didaktikzentrum, pp. 5-6.''

''Decoding the Disciplines'' did not spring from whole cloth but evolved over several years from a framework to a model to a theory. It was born in 1996, when the Vice Chancellor of Indiana University Bloomington invited [Joan] to form a team for an eight-day leadership institute facilitated by Pat Hutchings (Hutchings, Sciame-Giesecke, & Bender; 1996<ref>Hutchings, P., Sciame-Giesecke, S., & Bender, E., (1996). IU Summer Leadership Institute.</ref>). Teams from all eight Indiana University campuses were tasked with creating new programs to enhance teaching. One of the professors I invited to join the Bloomington team was David Pace. The Bloomington team’s idea was to bring together instructors of large gateway courses and place them in conversation with the literature on teaching and learning in a two-week, cross-disciplinary summer seminar, entitled “The Freshman Learning Project” (FLP). Upon the FLP’s inception, we immediately encountered a problem: With thousands of teaching methods to choose from, but no organizing theory, it was as though we had available to us both everything and nothing.

After learning of the bottleneck idea (Anderson, 1996)<ref>Anderson, J. A. (1996, October). ''Merging Teaching Effectiveness, Learning Outcomes, and Curricular Change with the Diverse Student Needs of the 21st Century'' [Keynote Presentation]. Professional and Organizational Development Network Conference, Salt Lake City, UT.</ref>, we worked it into the second FLP seminar. Bottlenecks did not offer a solution to our too-many-methods problem; nevertheless, it gave us the first step of our framework and afforded each instructor autonomy in choosing a focus for their efforts. Those familiar with David Pace and me know that each of us is inherently disinclined to abandon learners or instructors stuck in the bottleneck. Together with the FLP participants, we began experimenting with ways to get ''through'' the bottlenecks.

Some of the experiments turned out better than others. For example, we challenged one of the deans, an administrator and project funder, to re-experience novice learning. After a one hour knitting lesson, he demanded that we “NEVER DO THAT TO ANOTHER PROFESSOR AGAIN!” In our next experiment, we interviewed a religious studies professor and dean, inviting him to pick something that his students struggled with in class. It turned out that his students were not reading in the ways he wanted. His course used different kinds of texts, requiring four kinds of reading: skimming for popular fiction; close readings for translated Biblical texts; analyses for research articles; and positionality for author identity. He realized he had never explained the differences in reading approaches. This experiment resulted in our first ''Decoding'' interview. These two administrators became key boosters of the FLP and funders of the change we were bringing to campus (Middendorf, 2001)<ref>Middendorf, J. (2001). Getting administrative support for your project. ''To Improve the Academy'', ''19''(1), 346-359. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/tia.17063888.0019.023</ref>.

With their ongoing support, we led the seminar for eleven consecutive years, which allowed for continual refinement of the ''Decoding'' framework. In collaboration with instructors and other partners over the early years of the summer FLP seminar, we refined activities into a model and eventually a theory. In 2004 we presented at the first ISSOTL conference and published our model (Middendorf & Pace, 2004<ref name=":0" />), editing the volume that featured the ways instructors from various field applied ''Decoding'', evidence that the sharing Step (Step 7), which we deliberately designed to encourage analysis and inquiry in SoTL, worked. With ''Decoding the Disciplines,'' we had found an elegant structure to guide our work, a framework that filled a gap in theory, and a model for lesson design.

Further, ''Decoding'' has been enriched and transformed by ''Disrupting the Disciplines'' (Lindstrom, Easton, Yeo, & Attas, 2022)<ref>Lindstrom, G., Easton, L., Yeo, M., & Attas, R. (2022). The disrupting interview: a framework to approach decolonization. ''International Journal for Academic Development'', 1-13, [https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2022.2103560 10.1080/1360144X.2022.2103560].</ref>, with its focus on the heretofore hidden or avoided bottlenecks of colonialism, racism, identity, implicit bias, and related antiracist pedagogies.

==Decoding the Disciplines as a framework==
Decoding is highly integrated and integrative. It combines elements of research on expertise and misconceptions, of professional development, of coaching, of collegial counseling, and of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning into a process of teaching development, which acknowledges the difficulties students have in learning subject-specific patterns of thought and action as inherent to processes of teaching and learning. Decoding focuses on the difficulty of the subject matter in a systemic way. It avoids infertile thinking that seeks the failure of teaching primarily among students, or in a wrong selection of teaching method.

==References==
<references />

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-27T14:52:47Z

Joan Middendorf: /* Bottleneck writing tour */

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process. Colloquially the second step is sometimes also referred to as "Decoding" because many perceive it as the central step of Decoding the Disciplines.

There is a variety of techniques to “decode” the [[Mental moves|mental move]] of the specialist, besides the [[Decoding interview|interview]], to “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck [[Decoding as a writing process|writing tour]], concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few.<ref name=":1">Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> The advantage of these “flash" techniques is that they are efficient and effective while being fun!

All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline.
== Decoding interview ==
This exploration of mental moves is often carried out in an interview setting with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

→Main article: [[Decoding interview]]

== Alternative Decoding techniques (aka Flash Decoding) ==
While the second step of the[[Decoding the Disciplines]] model privileges the interview, a memorable and reliable step, it has a few drawbacks. Limitations of Decoding interviews include:

# The interview isn’t always 100’% successful in unpacking the specialist’s thinking into intelligible components and must be revisited several times for success.
# Interviews are arduous, sometimes like mental duels with the specialist making analytical leaps that leave the interviewers adrift in unknown territory without a clear path forward.
# Interviews are time consuming. When only one specialist can be interviewed at a time and some ''Decoding'' groups as large as 100 needing to uncover their mental moves, there’s not enough time or staff to conduct the interviews. Flash ''Decoding'' offers a potent short-cut to uncover the often-invisible mental moves of educators. Alternate forms of ''Decoding'' give us that “flash” of insight that helps us uncover implicit mental processing so they can be brought to the forefront and scaffolded for the students”<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J., & Mondelli, V. (in press.) "[[Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview]].” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.</ref>

=== Analogies ===
One of the most powerful alternative techniques for Decoding is through analogies, metaphors, and narrative stories, although for brevity, we refer to all these as “analogies”. Analogies are inferential frameworks that help novices or students learn new ideas because they can transfer something they know in one domain to a different or new domain.<ref>Jones, N. A., H. Ross, T. Lynam, P. Perez, and A. Leitch. 2011. Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. ''Ecology and Society'' '''16'''(1): 46. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/</ref>

To come up with an analogy, it helps to consider the characteristics of a good analogy. It must be from outside the target field because the new context helps see the characteristics of the analogy (and thus the characteristics of the mental move). What is this kind of thinking? What is the DOING? Where does it fit in [[Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology|Bloom’s typology]]? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating?<ref name=":1" /> Once we have classified the type of mental move, we’re ready to look for a new context, the analogic context.

The prompts for finding an analogy, are, “What is this kind of thinking '''like'''?” and “Where have I seen this mental move before?” When placing the mental move in a new context, be sure the new context is relatable to students or your audience.

=== Bottleneck writing tour ===
A [[Decoding as a writing process|reflective writing process]] with rounds of reiterative writing about the bottleneck and the mental move.<ref>Lahm, S. (2016).''Writing in teaching: Tools for instructors''. UTB Barbara Budrich.</ref> This process uses a series of prompts focused on [[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Step 1 Identify the Bottlenecks]] and Step 2 Uncover the Tacit Reasoning of the Specialist. It works well when Decoding in large groups and self-directed teams. The final question brings in the interlocutor(s).

=== Concept or mindmapping or flow charting ===
Ask the specialist to make a concept/mind map or flow chart of the mental move and explain in words (a think-aloud) as they draw it. Be sure to write down what they say.

=== Three-dimensional modeling ===
Use simple materials such as playdough, Legos, or sticks and grass from the garden, build a physical model of the mental move. Then write down in a few words what the model portrays. Voila—what we write down describes the mental move.

=== Rubric building ===
Start by listing frequent mistakes students make on a specific concept or assignment (the bottlenecks). Then create a corresponding list of the opposite of each mistake—a list of what the specialist does to avoid each mistake—which turns out to be a list of the mental moves.

As an example, Shopkow, in her [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|SoTL award winning article]] shows the rubric she made for writing article reviews and microhistory.<ref>Shopkow, L. (2017). [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|How many sources do I need?]] ''The History Teacher'', ''50''(2), 169–200. Rubric in Appendix A.</ref> The rubric is based on a comparison of student mistakes and desired mental moves, which she calls the GOAL. To create the rubric, she lists the mistakes (bottlenecks) students make in identifying a historical argument for an article review. The reviewer doesn’t

* identify the argument in the article correctly (the argument as the reviewer has presented it doesn’t make sense).
* explain the argument in the article clearly (I can’t figure out what the argument is from what the reviewer has said).
* doesn’t recognize the argument.
* address all the parts of the argument.

Besides listing the mistakes, Shopkow also provides the GOAL for making an argument

* the reviewer “clearly explains the argument in the article, giving the parts of the argument as well as the overall argument.”

The goal in her rubric spells out the desired mental move.

=== Game mechanics ===
“At the heart of designing an ''educational'' game, the instructor considers which mental moves to center the game around. What kind of thinking do we want students to practice in the game? To do so, just as when flash ''Decoding'' with analogies, we start from a bottleneck—where do students struggle to understand? What kind of thinking will this entail? How does flash ''Decoding'' with game mechanics work? Choose a bottleneck in your course where students repeatedly struggle. These days, we can ask Chat GPT to brainstorm the reasoning an expert uses to get through the bottleneck. Then we can ask Chat GPT to build a game.”<ref name=":0" />
== References ==

Decoding as a writing process

2025-04-27T14:46:58Z

Joan Middendorf:

Although frequently featured, the [[Step 2 - Decoding Interview|Decoding interview]] is by now not the exclusive method for decoding expertise. Svenja Kaduk and Swantje Lahm have developed a structured writing process that allows teachers to decode their expertise by themselves. To this end, they ask a series of questions about the bottleneck and then about the thinking they do to get through the bottleneck. The questions are provided as writing prompts. Originally the prompts have been written in German.<ref>[[Decoding the Disciplines - Ein Ansatz für forschendes Lernen und Lehren]]</ref>

Formally, the writing process is a combination of Steps 1 and 2 of the [[Decoding the Disciplines|Decoding process]].
==Writing prompts==
[[File:writing process.jpg|alt=photo of writing prompts printed on cards|thumb|Flash cards containing writing prompts]]
===Determine the bottleneck===
Ask yourself: In which situation do students struggle or fail in my class? What type of tasks or (exam) problems are regularly difficult for them? List some of these situations.

Then decide to proceed with a bottleneck on your list you are really concerned about.

===Explicate the bottleneck===
Describe the bottleneck as precisely as possible. What is it that students don't do or don't do correctly? What is it that they don't understand?

===What do you do?===
Describe what you as an expert in your discipline do, such that you do not get stuck. For example ask yourself: What do I do to cope with the bottleneck?

===Check===
Look again at the bottleneck and ask yourself: Have I selected a too large bottleneck? Or one that is too small? Is its description too vague? Is the bottleneck really about an issue which is essential to my discipline or class?

Again, describe the bottleneck as precisely as possible. Ask yourself: Is the bottleneck related to characteristic misconceptions?

===What experts do===

Try to describe in more detail how a professional in your discipline would proceed when faced with the problem: What steps would a professional take to accomplish the task? What would he/she do?

Many of these steps may be so obvious to you that you are not aware of them. Try to make yourself aware of these steps and break large steps down into as many sub-steps as possible.

Example: A specialist in German studies says: "Students must first observe before they interpret." The next question would be: What does a Germanist do when she observes?

===Obtain feedback (1)===
Explain the learning obstacle to a colleague from another subject. Then describe what you do as a professional. The colleague will ask if he/she has not understood something.

===Obtain feedback (2)===
Now ask the colleague to describe in their own words how he/she understood the learning obstacle and your approach. If he/she is also dealing with a learning obstacle, you can then swap roles.

===Continue writing===
Now return to your text and read what you have written so far. Try to become even clearer: What am I doing? How exactly? Which steps follow each other? Continue to stick to the description of your solution to the problem. It is not about explaining how you would teach these steps to others, only about describing the steps yourself precisely.
===Detect difficulties===
Ask yourself: Is there something that makes this topic difficult for me? If so, what is it? Make notes on this too.

===Continue writing===
Continue to describe your approach. If you realize that you are getting stuck, ask yourself: What is missing? What haven't I said yet

===Review===
Ask yourself: Does this feel complete?

If YES: Check again how you notice this and write down something about it.

f NO, think about: What is missing? Which steps are still too big or too unclear?

===Reflect===
Write down in one or two sentences what you have achieved so far by following the individual reflection steps.

==References==
<references />
[[Category:Decoding work]]
[[Category:General]]

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-27T14:38:22Z

Joan Middendorf:

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process. Colloquially the second step is sometimes also referred to as "Decoding" because many perceive it as the central step of Decoding the Disciplines.

There is a variety of techniques to “decode” the [[Mental moves|mental move]] of the specialist, besides the [[Decoding interview|interview]], to “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck [[Decoding as a writing process|writing tour]], concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few.<ref name=":1">Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> The advantage of these “flash" techniques is that they are efficient and effective while being fun!

All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline.
== Decoding interview ==
This exploration of mental moves is often carried out in an interview setting with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

→Main article: [[Decoding interview]]

== Alternative Decoding techniques (aka Flash Decoding) ==
While the second step of the[[Decoding the Disciplines]] model privileges the interview, a memorable and reliable step, it has a few drawbacks. Limitations of Decoding interviews include:

# The interview isn’t always 100’% successful in unpacking the specialist’s thinking into intelligible components and must be revisited several times for success.
# Interviews are arduous, sometimes like mental duels with the specialist making analytical leaps that leave the interviewers adrift in unknown territory without a clear path forward.
# Interviews are time consuming. When only one specialist can be interviewed at a time and some ''Decoding'' groups as large as 100 needing to uncover their mental moves, there’s not enough time or staff to conduct the interviews. Flash ''Decoding'' offers a potent short-cut to uncover the often-invisible mental moves of educators. Alternate forms of ''Decoding'' give us that “flash” of insight that helps us uncover implicit mental processing so they can be brought to the forefront and scaffolded for the students”<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J., & Mondelli, V. (in press.) "[[Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview]].” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.</ref>

=== Analogies ===
One of the most powerful alternative techniques for Decoding is through analogies, metaphors, and narrative stories, although for brevity, we refer to all these as “analogies”. Analogies are inferential frameworks that help novices or students learn new ideas because they can transfer something they know in one domain to a different or new domain.<ref>Jones, N. A., H. Ross, T. Lynam, P. Perez, and A. Leitch. 2011. Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. ''Ecology and Society'' '''16'''(1): 46. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/</ref>

To come up with an analogy, it helps to consider the characteristics of a good analogy. It must be from outside the target field because the new context helps see the characteristics of the analogy (and thus the characteristics of the mental move). What is this kind of thinking? What is the DOING? Where does it fit in [[Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology|Bloom’s typology]]? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating?<ref name=":1" /> Once we have classified the type of mental move, we’re ready to look for a new context, the analogic context.

The prompts for finding an analogy, are, “What is this kind of thinking '''like'''?” and “Where have I seen this mental move before?” When placing the mental move in a new context, be sure the new context is relatable to students or your audience.

=== Bottleneck writing tour ===
A reflective writing process with rounds of reiterative writing about the bottleneck and the mental move.<ref>Lahm, S. (2016).''Writing in teaching: Tools for instructors''. UTB Barbara Budrich.</ref> This process uses a series of prompts focused on [[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Step 1 Identify the Bottlenecks]] and Step 2 Uncover the Tacit Reasoning of the Specialist. It works well when Decoding in large groups and self-directed teams. The final question brings in the interlocutor(s).

=== Concept or mindmapping or flow charting ===
Ask the specialist to make a concept/mind map or flow chart of the mental move and explain in words (a think-aloud) as they draw it. Be sure to write down what they say.

=== Three-dimensional modeling ===
Use simple materials such as playdough, Legos, or sticks and grass from the garden, build a physical model of the mental move. Then write down in a few words what the model portrays. Voila—what we write down describes the mental move.

=== Rubric building ===
Start by listing frequent mistakes students make on a specific concept or assignment (the bottlenecks). Then create a corresponding list of the opposite of each mistake—a list of what the specialist does to avoid each mistake—which turns out to be a list of the mental moves.

As an example, Shopkow, in her [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|SoTL award winning article]] shows the rubric she made for writing article reviews and microhistory.<ref>Shopkow, L. (2017). [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|How many sources do I need?]] ''The History Teacher'', ''50''(2), 169–200. Rubric in Appendix A.</ref> The rubric is based on a comparison of student mistakes and desired mental moves, which she calls the GOAL. To create the rubric, she lists the mistakes (bottlenecks) students make in identifying a historical argument for an article review. The reviewer doesn’t

* identify the argument in the article correctly (the argument as the reviewer has presented it doesn’t make sense).
* explain the argument in the article clearly (I can’t figure out what the argument is from what the reviewer has said).
* doesn’t recognize the argument.
* address all the parts of the argument.

Besides listing the mistakes, Shopkow also provides the GOAL for making an argument

* the reviewer “clearly explains the argument in the article, giving the parts of the argument as well as the overall argument.”

The goal in her rubric spells out the desired mental move.

=== Game mechanics ===
“At the heart of designing an ''educational'' game, the instructor considers which mental moves to center the game around. What kind of thinking do we want students to practice in the game? To do so, just as when flash ''Decoding'' with analogies, we start from a bottleneck—where do students struggle to understand? What kind of thinking will this entail? How does flash ''Decoding'' with game mechanics work? Choose a bottleneck in your course where students repeatedly struggle. These days, we can ask Chat GPT to brainstorm the reasoning an expert uses to get through the bottleneck. Then we can ask Chat GPT to build a game.”<ref name=":0" />
== References ==

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-27T14:37:45Z

Joan Middendorf: removed warning message

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process. Colloquially the second step is sometimes also referred to as "Decoding" because many perceive it as the central step of Decoding the Disciplines.

There is a variety of techniques to “decode” the [[Mental moves|mental move]] of the specialist, besides the [[Decoding interview|interview]], to “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck [[Decoding as a writing process|writing tour]], concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few.<ref name=":1">Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> The advantages of these “flash" techniques is that they are efficient and effective while being fun!

All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline.
== Decoding interview ==
This exploration of mental moves is often carried out in an interview setting with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

→Main article: [[Decoding interview]]

== Alternative Decoding techniques (aka Flash Decoding) ==
While the second step of the[[Decoding the Disciplines]] model privileges the interview, a memorable and reliable step, it has a few drawbacks. Limitations of Decoding interviews include:

# The interview isn’t always 100’% successful in unpacking the specialist’s thinking into intelligible components and must be revisited several times for success.
# Interviews are arduous, sometimes like mental duels with the specialist making analytical leaps that leave the interviewers adrift in unknown territory without a clear path forward.
# Interviews are time consuming. When only one specialist can be interviewed at a time and some ''Decoding'' groups as large as 100 needing to uncover their mental moves, there’s not enough time or staff to conduct the interviews. Flash ''Decoding'' offers a potent short-cut to uncover the often-invisible mental moves of educators. Alternate forms of ''Decoding'' give us that “flash” of insight that helps us uncover implicit mental processing so they can be brought to the forefront and scaffolded for the students”<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J., & Mondelli, V. (in press.) "[[Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview]].” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.</ref>

=== Analogies ===
One of the most powerful alternative techniques for Decoding is through analogies, metaphors, and narrative stories, although for brevity, we refer to all these as “analogies”. Analogies are inferential frameworks that help novices or students learn new ideas because they can transfer something they know in one domain to a different or new domain.<ref>Jones, N. A., H. Ross, T. Lynam, P. Perez, and A. Leitch. 2011. Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. ''Ecology and Society'' '''16'''(1): 46. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/</ref>

To come up with an analogy, it helps to consider the characteristics of a good analogy. It must be from outside the target field because the new context helps see the characteristics of the analogy (and thus the characteristics of the mental move). What is this kind of thinking? What is the DOING? Where does it fit in [[Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology|Bloom’s typology]]? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating?<ref name=":1" /> Once we have classified the type of mental move, we’re ready to look for a new context, the analogic context.

The prompts for finding an analogy, are, “What is this kind of thinking '''like'''?” and “Where have I seen this mental move before?” When placing the mental move in a new context, be sure the new context is relatable to students or your audience.

=== Bottleneck writing tour ===
A reflective writing process with rounds of reiterative writing about the bottleneck and the mental move.<ref>Lahm, S. (2016).''Writing in teaching: Tools for instructors''. UTB Barbara Budrich.</ref> This process uses a series of prompts focused on [[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Step 1 Identify the Bottlenecks]] and Step 2 Uncover the Tacit Reasoning of the Specialist. It works well when Decoding in large groups and self-directed teams. The final question brings in the interlocutor(s).

=== Concept or mindmapping or flow charting ===
Ask the specialist to make a concept/mind map or flow chart of the mental move and explain in words (a think-aloud) as they draw it. Be sure to write down what they say.

=== Three-dimensional modeling ===
Use simple materials such as playdough, Legos, or sticks and grass from the garden, build a physical model of the mental move. Then write down in a few words what the model portrays. Voila—what we write down describes the mental move.

=== Rubric building ===
Start by listing frequent mistakes students make on a specific concept or assignment (the bottlenecks). Then create a corresponding list of the opposite of each mistake—a list of what the specialist does to avoid each mistake—which turns out to be a list of the mental moves.

As an example, Shopkow, in her [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|SoTL award winning article]] shows the rubric she made for writing article reviews and microhistory.<ref>Shopkow, L. (2017). [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|How many sources do I need?]] ''The History Teacher'', ''50''(2), 169–200. Rubric in Appendix A.</ref> The rubric is based on a comparison of student mistakes and desired mental moves, which she calls the GOAL. To create the rubric, she lists the mistakes (bottlenecks) students make in identifying a historical argument for an article review. The reviewer doesn’t

* identify the argument in the article correctly (the argument as the reviewer has presented it doesn’t make sense).
* explain the argument in the article clearly (I can’t figure out what the argument is from what the reviewer has said).
* doesn’t recognize the argument.
* address all the parts of the argument.

Besides listing the mistakes, Shopkow also provides the GOAL for making an argument

* the reviewer “clearly explains the argument in the article, giving the parts of the argument as well as the overall argument.”

The goal in her rubric spells out the desired mental move.

=== Game mechanics ===
“At the heart of designing an ''educational'' game, the instructor considers which mental moves to center the game around. What kind of thinking do we want students to practice in the game? To do so, just as when flash ''Decoding'' with analogies, we start from a bottleneck—where do students struggle to understand? What kind of thinking will this entail? How does flash ''Decoding'' with game mechanics work? Choose a bottleneck in your course where students repeatedly struggle. These days, we can ask Chat GPT to brainstorm the reasoning an expert uses to get through the bottleneck. Then we can ask Chat GPT to build a game.”<ref name=":0" />
== References ==

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-27T14:36:45Z

Joan Middendorf: completed the sentence

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process. Colloquially the second step is sometimes also referred to as "Decoding" because many perceive it as the central step of Decoding the Disciplines.

There is a variety of techniques to “decode” the [[Mental moves|mental move]] of the specialist, besides the [[Decoding interview|interview]], to “flash” techniques which include analogies and game mechanics, the bottleneck [[Decoding as a writing process|writing tour]], concept/mind mapping or flow charting, 3-d modeling with playdough or other simple materials, and rubric building, to name a few.<ref name=":1">Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> The advantages of these “flash" techniques is that they are efficient and effective while being fun!

{{Textbox|boxtype=warning|header=Text missing|text=Sentence incomplete|icon=yes}}

All of the various ''Decoding'' techniques involve conversation with an interlocutor, preferably one from a different discipline.
== Decoding interview ==
This exploration of mental moves is often carried out in an interview setting with typically two interviewers helping the instructor to make his or her expertise explicit.

→Main article: [[Decoding interview]]

== Alternative Decoding techniques (aka Flash Decoding) ==
While the second step of the[[Decoding the Disciplines]] model privileges the interview, a memorable and reliable step, it has a few drawbacks. Limitations of Decoding interviews include:

# The interview isn’t always 100’% successful in unpacking the specialist’s thinking into intelligible components and must be revisited several times for success.
# Interviews are arduous, sometimes like mental duels with the specialist making analytical leaps that leave the interviewers adrift in unknown territory without a clear path forward.
# Interviews are time consuming. When only one specialist can be interviewed at a time and some ''Decoding'' groups as large as 100 needing to uncover their mental moves, there’s not enough time or staff to conduct the interviews. Flash ''Decoding'' offers a potent short-cut to uncover the often-invisible mental moves of educators. Alternate forms of ''Decoding'' give us that “flash” of insight that helps us uncover implicit mental processing so they can be brought to the forefront and scaffolded for the students”<ref name=":0">Middendorf, J., & Mondelli, V. (in press.) "[[Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview]].” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.</ref>

=== Analogies ===
One of the most powerful alternative techniques for Decoding is through analogies, metaphors, and narrative stories, although for brevity, we refer to all these as “analogies”. Analogies are inferential frameworks that help novices or students learn new ideas because they can transfer something they know in one domain to a different or new domain.<ref>Jones, N. A., H. Ross, T. Lynam, P. Perez, and A. Leitch. 2011. Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. ''Ecology and Society'' '''16'''(1): 46. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/</ref>

To come up with an analogy, it helps to consider the characteristics of a good analogy. It must be from outside the target field because the new context helps see the characteristics of the analogy (and thus the characteristics of the mental move). What is this kind of thinking? What is the DOING? Where does it fit in [[Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology|Bloom’s typology]]? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating?<ref name=":1" /> Once we have classified the type of mental move, we’re ready to look for a new context, the analogic context.

The prompts for finding an analogy, are, “What is this kind of thinking '''like'''?” and “Where have I seen this mental move before?” When placing the mental move in a new context, be sure the new context is relatable to students or your audience.

=== Bottleneck writing tour ===
A reflective writing process with rounds of reiterative writing about the bottleneck and the mental move.<ref>Lahm, S. (2016).''Writing in teaching: Tools for instructors''. UTB Barbara Budrich.</ref> This process uses a series of prompts focused on [[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Step 1 Identify the Bottlenecks]] and Step 2 Uncover the Tacit Reasoning of the Specialist. It works well when Decoding in large groups and self-directed teams. The final question brings in the interlocutor(s).

=== Concept or mindmapping or flow charting ===
Ask the specialist to make a concept/mind map or flow chart of the mental move and explain in words (a think-aloud) as they draw it. Be sure to write down what they say.

=== Three-dimensional modeling ===
Use simple materials such as playdough, Legos, or sticks and grass from the garden, build a physical model of the mental move. Then write down in a few words what the model portrays. Voila—what we write down describes the mental move.

=== Rubric building ===
Start by listing frequent mistakes students make on a specific concept or assignment (the bottlenecks). Then create a corresponding list of the opposite of each mistake—a list of what the specialist does to avoid each mistake—which turns out to be a list of the mental moves.

As an example, Shopkow, in her [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|SoTL award winning article]] shows the rubric she made for writing article reviews and microhistory.<ref>Shopkow, L. (2017). [[How Many Sources Do I Need?|How many sources do I need?]] ''The History Teacher'', ''50''(2), 169–200. Rubric in Appendix A.</ref> The rubric is based on a comparison of student mistakes and desired mental moves, which she calls the GOAL. To create the rubric, she lists the mistakes (bottlenecks) students make in identifying a historical argument for an article review. The reviewer doesn’t

* identify the argument in the article correctly (the argument as the reviewer has presented it doesn’t make sense).
* explain the argument in the article clearly (I can’t figure out what the argument is from what the reviewer has said).
* doesn’t recognize the argument.
* address all the parts of the argument.

Besides listing the mistakes, Shopkow also provides the GOAL for making an argument

* the reviewer “clearly explains the argument in the article, giving the parts of the argument as well as the overall argument.”

The goal in her rubric spells out the desired mental move.

=== Game mechanics ===
“At the heart of designing an ''educational'' game, the instructor considers which mental moves to center the game around. What kind of thinking do we want students to practice in the game? To do so, just as when flash ''Decoding'' with analogies, we start from a bottleneck—where do students struggle to understand? What kind of thinking will this entail? How does flash ''Decoding'' with game mechanics work? Choose a bottleneck in your course where students repeatedly struggle. These days, we can ask Chat GPT to brainstorm the reasoning an expert uses to get through the bottleneck. Then we can ask Chat GPT to build a game.”<ref name=":0" />
== References ==

Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology

2025-04-27T14:32:04Z

Joan Middendorf: Added a diagram

'''Joan Middendorf's revision of Bloom's Typology''' applies [[wikipedia:Bloom's_taxonomy|Bloom's Taxonomy]] to [[Decoding the Disciplines]] in order to classify different types of [[mental moves]].<ref>Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> “What kind of thinking is this in regards to Bloom’s typology? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating? Bloom’s typology differentiate the functions of various mental moves (MIddendorf & Mondelli, in press).
[[File:Inverted pyramid of Bloom's Typology.png|alt=inverted pyramid listing types of thinking in order of difficulty|thumb|Middendorf's version of Bloom's typology (Hall & Johnson, 1994)]]

== Creating ==
Combining elements to form a new, original entity.
* '''Verbs to Use:''' synthesize, create, combine, plan, design, produce, compile, develop, compose, modify, organize, reconstruct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Designing a new hospital for our city.
* '''Analogy:''' “Imagine you wake up to find you are a sponge. Describe visually your adventures during the day.” - Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse

==Evaluating==
Making judgments based on criteria or standards.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' judge, evaluate, conclude, contrast, develop criteria, appraise, criticize, support, decide, compare
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Judging the quality of my care in the hospital.
*'''Analogy:''' Judging a Olympic skiing events, downhill race versus freestyle.

==Analyzing==
Breaking material into constituent parts and determine how parts relate to one another and to an overall structure.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' analyze, debate, differentiate, generalize, conclude, organize, breakdown, dissect, diagram, relate
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Investigating charges on my hospital bill.
*'''Analogy:''' Taking apart a computer and examining the insides down to the microchips.

==Applying==
Using procedures to perform tasks or solve problems in new, but similar situations.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' demonstrate, apply, use, solve, choose appropriate procedures, modify, produce, construct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Using procedures for admittance, blood draws, etc.
* '''Analogy:''' Filling out one’s tax forms.

==Understanding==
Integrating new materials into existing schema and explaining it in own words.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' explain, interpret, illustrate, describe, summarize, expand, convert, measure, defend, paraphrase, rewrite, comprehend
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Explaining directions to the local hospital.
* '''Analogy:''' Describing how to make an elevator pitch in your own words.

==Remembering==
Recalling or recognizing information from memory.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' list, tell, define, identify, label, locate, recognize, describe, match, name, outline, reproduce, state
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Memorizing the local hospital’s address.
*'''Analogy:''' Memorizing a phone number.

== References ==
<references />Middendorf, J., & Mondelli, V. (in press.) “Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.

Hall, C. & Johnson, A. (1994) Module A5: Planning a Test or Examination. In B. Imrie & C. Hall, Assessment of Student Performance. Wellington, New Zealand: University Teaching Development Centre, Victoria University of Wellington.

File:Inverted pyramid of Bloom's Typology.png

2025-04-27T14:27:03Z

Joan Middendorf:

An inverted pyramid listing the simpler forms of thinking in Bloom's typology below plus verbs and the more complicated forms of thinking at the top of the pyramid. [[Category:Mental moves]]

Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology

2025-04-27T14:22:31Z

Joan Middendorf:

'''Joan Middendorf's revision of Bloom's Typology''' applies [[wikipedia:Bloom's_taxonomy|Bloom's Taxonomy]] to [[Decoding the Disciplines]] in order to classify different types of [[mental moves]].<ref>Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> “What kind of thinking is this? Where does it fit in Bloom’s typology? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating? Bloom’s typology differentiate the functions of various mental moves (MIddendorf & Mondelli, in press).

== Creating ==
Combining elements to form a new, original entity.
* '''Verbs to Use:''' synthesize, create, combine, plan, design, produce, compile, develop, compose, modify, organize, reconstruct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Designing a new hospital for our city.
* '''Analogy:''' “Imagine you wake up to find you are a sponge. Describe visually your adventures during the day.” - Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse

==Evaluating==
Making judgments based on criteria or standards.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' judge, evaluate, conclude, contrast, develop criteria, appraise, criticize, support, decide, compare
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Judging the quality of my care in the hospital.
*'''Analogy:''' Judging a Olympic skiing events, downhill race versus freestyle.

==Analyzing==
Breaking material into constituent parts and determine how parts relate to one another and to an overall structure.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' analyze, debate, differentiate, generalize, conclude, organize, breakdown, dissect, diagram, relate
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Investigating charges on my hospital bill.
*'''Analogy:''' Taking apart a computer and examining the insides down to the microchips.

==Applying==
Using procedures to perform tasks or solve problems in new, but similar situations.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' demonstrate, apply, use, solve, choose appropriate procedures, modify, produce, construct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Using procedures for admittance, blood draws, etc.
* '''Analogy:''' Filling out one’s tax forms.

==Understanding==
Integrating new materials into existing schema and explaining it in own words.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' explain, interpret, illustrate, describe, summarize, expand, convert, measure, defend, paraphrase, rewrite, comprehend
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Explaining directions to the local hospital.
* '''Analogy:''' Describing how to make an elevator pitch in your own words.

==Remembering==
Recalling or recognizing information from memory.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' list, tell, define, identify, label, locate, recognize, describe, match, name, outline, reproduce, state
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Memorizing the local hospital’s address.
*'''Analogy:''' Memorizing a phone number.

== References ==
<references />'''Middendorf, J.''', & Mondelli, V. (in press.) “Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.

Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology

2025-04-27T14:21:18Z

Joan Middendorf: Added explanation

'''Joan Middendorf's revision of Bloom's Typology''' applies [[wikipedia:Bloom's_taxonomy|Bloom's Taxonomy]] to [[Decoding the Disciplines]] in order to classify different types of [[mental moves]].<ref>Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref> “What kind of thinking is this? Where does it fit in Bloom’s typology? Is it remembering, paraphrasing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, or creating? Bloom’s typology differentiate the functions of various mental moves

== Creating ==
Combining elements to form a new, original entity.
* '''Verbs to Use:''' synthesize, create, combine, plan, design, produce, compile, develop, compose, modify, organize, reconstruct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Designing a new hospital for our city.
* '''Analogy:''' “Imagine you wake up to find you are a sponge. Describe visually your adventures during the day.” - Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse

==Evaluating==
Making judgments based on criteria or standards.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' judge, evaluate, conclude, contrast, develop criteria, appraise, criticize, support, decide, compare
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Judging the quality of my care in the hospital.
*'''Analogy:''' Judging a Olympic skiing events, downhill race versus freestyle.

==Analyzing==
Breaking material into constituent parts and determine how parts relate to one another and to an overall structure.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' analyze, debate, differentiate, generalize, conclude, organize, breakdown, dissect, diagram, relate
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Investigating charges on my hospital bill.
*'''Analogy:''' Taking apart a computer and examining the insides down to the microchips.

==Applying==
Using procedures to perform tasks or solve problems in new, but similar situations.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' demonstrate, apply, use, solve, choose appropriate procedures, modify, produce, construct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Using procedures for admittance, blood draws, etc.
* '''Analogy:''' Filling out one’s tax forms.

==Understanding==
Integrating new materials into existing schema and explaining it in own words.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' explain, interpret, illustrate, describe, summarize, expand, convert, measure, defend, paraphrase, rewrite, comprehend
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Explaining directions to the local hospital.
* '''Analogy:''' Describing how to make an elevator pitch in your own words.

==Remembering==
Recalling or recognizing information from memory.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' list, tell, define, identify, label, locate, recognize, describe, match, name, outline, reproduce, state
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Memorizing the local hospital’s address.
*'''Analogy:''' Memorizing a phone number.

== References ==
<references />'''Middendorf, J.''', & Mondelli, V. (in press.) “Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.

Middendorf’s Revised Bloom’s Typology

2025-04-27T14:17:32Z

Joan Middendorf: Added a reference

'''Joan Middendorf's revision of Bloom's Typology''' applies [[wikipedia:Bloom's_taxonomy|Bloom's Taxonomy]] to [[Decoding the Disciplines]] in order to classify different types of [[mental moves]].<ref>Middendorf, J., & Shopkow, L. (2017). ''[[Overcoming Student Learning Bottlenecks|Overcoming student learning bottlenecks: Decode the critical thinking of your discipline]]''. Stylus Publishing, LLC.</ref>

== Creating ==
Combining elements to form a new, original entity.
* '''Verbs to Use:''' synthesize, create, combine, plan, design, produce, compile, develop, compose, modify, organize, reconstruct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Designing a new hospital for our city.
* '''Analogy:''' “Imagine you wake up to find you are a sponge. Describe visually your adventures during the day.” - Roy Ascott’s Groundcourse

==Evaluating==
Making judgments based on criteria or standards.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' judge, evaluate, conclude, contrast, develop criteria, appraise, criticize, support, decide, compare
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Judging the quality of my care in the hospital.
*'''Analogy:''' Judging a Olympic skiing events, downhill race versus freestyle.

==Analyzing==
Breaking material into constituent parts and determine how parts relate to one another and to an overall structure.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' analyze, debate, differentiate, generalize, conclude, organize, breakdown, dissect, diagram, relate
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Investigating charges on my hospital bill.
*'''Analogy:''' Taking apart a computer and examining the insides down to the microchips.

==Applying==
Using procedures to perform tasks or solve problems in new, but similar situations.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' demonstrate, apply, use, solve, choose appropriate procedures, modify, produce, construct
* '''Hospital Analogy:''' Using procedures for admittance, blood draws, etc.
* '''Analogy:''' Filling out one’s tax forms.

==Understanding==
Integrating new materials into existing schema and explaining it in own words.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' explain, interpret, illustrate, describe, summarize, expand, convert, measure, defend, paraphrase, rewrite, comprehend
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Explaining directions to the local hospital.
* '''Analogy:''' Describing how to make an elevator pitch in your own words.

==Remembering==
Recalling or recognizing information from memory.

*'''Verbs to Use:''' list, tell, define, identify, label, locate, recognize, describe, match, name, outline, reproduce, state
*'''Hospital Analogy:''' Memorizing the local hospital’s address.
*'''Analogy:''' Memorizing a phone number.

== References ==
<references />'''Middendorf, J.''', & Mondelli, V. (in press.) “Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.

Decoding the Disciplines

2025-04-25T17:58:22Z

Joan Middendorf: tweaked the title for this page--focus in on the difficult that the student or learner encounters.

Decoding the Disciplines

2025-04-25T17:56:51Z

Joan Middendorf: Revised this overview

Pages needed

2025-04-25T16:22:31Z

Joan Middendorf: wrote several paragraphs for Step 2 Decodoing

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|[[Limits]]
|[[User:Riegler|Peter Riegler]]
|uploading parts 4 and 5 of interview
|
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|
|-
|Alternative Decoding techniques
|Joan Middendorf
|analogies, bottleneck writing tour, 3-d modeling, rubrics, game mechanics, etc
|done
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks
|
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|Transformative Dialogues
|
|describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.
|
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Pages needed

2025-04-25T16:20:24Z

Joan Middendorf: Paragraph compares Decoding to Threshold Concepts

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|[[Limits]]
|[[User:Riegler|Peter Riegler]]
|uploading parts 4 and 5 of interview
|
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|
|-
|Trading analogies
|
|
|
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks
|
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace or Joan Middendorf
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Added section comparing Decoding to TCs
|-
|Transformative Dialogues
|
|describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.
|
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Pages needed

2025-04-25T16:18:29Z

Joan Middendorf:

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Topic
!People willing to contribute
!Details
!Status
|-
|[[Limits]]
|[[User:Riegler|Peter Riegler]]
|uploading parts 4 and 5 of interview
|
|-
|<s>Language comprehension</s>
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>Summarizing the decoding work descriped in [[Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise]]</s>
|done -> [[Textual descriptions in mathematics]]
|-
|[[The Decoding Clock Reading Activity|<s>The Decoding Clock Reading Activity</s>]]
|[[User:Riegler|<s>Peter Riegler</s>]]
|<s>describe mental tasks</s>
|done -> [[Reading a clock]]
|-
|Transition to College project
|David Pace
|describe the project, results etc.
|
|-
|Trading analogies
|
|
|
|-
|[[Bottleneck]]
|
|describe flavors of bottlenecks
|
|-
|[[Threshold concept]]
|David Pace
|describe relationship to bottlenecks and Decoding
|Compared Decoding to TCs
|-
|Transformative Dialogues
|
|describe role of journal, link to journal, etc.
|
|-
|Graph reading
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|Reading scholarly work
|
|Sort of a review article summarizing research work on this topic
|
|-
|[[Faculty development]]
|[[Peter Riegler]] (appreciating a helpful hand in particular when it comes to FLP etc.) -- I can help on this.
|describe how Decoding is used for faculty development; give some history (e.g. FLP); link to relevant Decoding literature
|started
|-
|[[AI Literacy as a bottle neck]]
|
|As an aspect of digital literacy and being critical users of digital tools, it is important to address AI literacy as an bottleneck for social science students
|
|-
|More development of Disrupting page
|Michelle Yeo
|More information and references could be added to the current Disrupting page
|
|-
|[[New to Decoding?]]
|David Pace
|
|
|}
See also [[Special:WantedPages]] for further pages needed.

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-25T15:47:04Z

Joan Middendorf: Added new page

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process.

== Interview ==
[[Decoding interview]]

== Resources ==

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-25T15:43:26Z

Joan Middendorf: /* Alternatives to the Interview-aka Flash ''Decoding'' */

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process.

== Interview ==
[[Decoding interview]]

'''Middendorf, J.''', & Mondelli, V. (in press.) “Flash Decoding with analogies and game mechanics: Alternatives to the Decoding interview.” Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal.

== Resources ==

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves/Resources

2025-04-25T15:39:49Z

Joan Middendorf: Inserted list for references

{{Hint|text= '''How to use this template'''
# Start by inserting '''Bibliographic data''' in the corresponding Section below. Using APA-style is preferred. Most important, however, is that the data is correct and allows to locate the publication.
# If the publication is available for download on the internet insert the corresponding link in the Section '''External reference'''.
# Add abstract if available# When done editing, save page.
# When in reading mode, add suitable tags/categories by pressing the tag symbol on the bottom of the page. The following types of tags are needed:
#* The tag [[:Category:PublishedWork|PublishedWork]] which will be used automatically if you use this template.
#* A tag referring to the [[:Category:PublicationType|PublicationType]] such as e.g. [[:Category:Article|Article]], [[:Category:Book|Book]], or [[:Category:Poster|Poster]]. See [[:Category:PublishedWork]] for a full list of currently available tags.
#* Tags to the academic discipline the publication is related to like Linguistics or Physics. If the published work is not related to a specific discipline, use the tag [[:Category:General|General]].
#* One tag for each author's name (in the form <code>Lastname, Initial1 Initial2</code>; please put initials without finals dots, i.e. <code>Doe, J</code> rather than <code>Doe, J.</code>)
#* A tag referring to the year of publication as a four digit number, e.g. <code>2025</code>.
# Edit once again and delete the whole Box '''How to use this Template''' and save your changes.
}}

==Abstract==

==Bibliographic data==

==External source==

[[Category:PublishedWork]]

Question 2: Uncovering the tacit mental moves

2025-04-25T15:30:55Z

Joan Middendorf: Revised the title

'''Uncovering the tacit mental moves''' is the second step of the [[Decoding the Disciplines]] process.

== Interview ==
[[Decoding interview]]

== Alternatives to the Interview-aka Flash ''Decoding'' ==

== Resources ==

Threshold concept

2025-04-25T15:25:47Z

Joan Middendorf: Added references

[[File:Treshhold concept 1743096802788.png|thumb|300x300px|A threshold concept it akin to a portal or a liminal space, opening up a new and previously inaccessible way of thinking about something.]]
A '''threshold concept''' is a core concepts which, once understood, transforms perception of a given subject, phenomenon, or experience. Its acquisition is inherently difficult. Metaphorically it involves being stuck by repeatedly bumping into a threshold until one manages to overcome the threshold. Other metaphors used are portal and liminal space, opening up a new and previously inaccessible way of thinking about something. The term threshold concept was coined by Jan Meyer and Ray Land.<ref name=":0">Meyer J H F and Land R 2003 "Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge: Linkages to Ways of Thinking and Practising" in ''Improving Student Learning: Ten Years On''. C. Rust (Ed), OCSLD, Oxford.</ref>

Like [[Decoding the Disciplines]] and Perkin's notion of troublesome knowledge, threshold concepts are a theory of difficulty, i.e. a theory explaining aspects of learning and teaching by focussing on difficulties inherent to them.<ref>Pace, D. (2017): [[The Decoding the Disciplines Paradigm: Seven Steps to Increased Student Learning]]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, p. 21</ref>

== Properties of threshold concepts ==
Threshold concepts typically have the following properties:<ref name=":0" />

* ''transformative'': Once a threshold concept has been understood, it can change the perception of a subject or part of it.
* ''irreversible'': The change in perspective that the acquisition of a threshold concept entails is difficult to forget or can only be unlearned again with considerable effort.
* ''integrative'': Threshold concepts reveal previously hidden connections.
* ''bounded'': Every concept has boundaries with thresholds to neighboring new conceptual areas.
* ''troublesome'': The internalisation of concepts is troublesome for a variety of reasons. Concepts can seem strange, implicit, conceptually difficult, counter-intuitive or characterized by over-complexity.

Threshold concepts are not only discussed for students who are familiarising themselves with a subject, but also for teachers and their understanding of teaching processes. According to Meyer and Land the idea of threshold concepts is a threshold concept by itself.<ref>J. H. F. Meyer, R. Land: ''Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning.'' In: ''Higher Education.'' Band 49, Nr. 3, 2005, S. 373–388</ref>

Give example of threshold concept

== Relation to Decoding the Disciplines ==
Threshold Concepts and [[Step 1 - Identify a Bottleneck to Learning|Step 1 Identify bottlenecks]] of ''Decoding the Disciplines'' both use theories of difficulty (Perkins, 2007) and focus on the hurdles of content. They both foreground the aspects of learning that prove consistently troublesome to uncover the tacit or “secret knowledge” of the discipline. Theories of difficulty design the challenge, but do not solve them. The main way the two theories differ is that ''Decoding the Disciplines'' from the start had a second theoretical component. Decoding Steps [[Step 3 - Modeling Mental Operations|3]]-[[Step 4|4]]-[[Step 5 - Motivate and lessen resistance|5]]-[[Step 6 - Assess Student Mastery|6]] navigate the problem using pedagogical theory. These Steps organize teaching and learning processes for good results, scaffolding instructional techniques to foster learning (Perkins, 2007). “The great strength of decoding is the methodology that undergirds the theory…,” (p. 41, Shopkow & Middendorf, 2019).

In categorial terms every threshold concept is a bottleneck while not every bottleneck is a threshold concept.

Shopkow <ref>Shopkow, Leah (2010). “[[What ‘Decoding the Disciplines’ has to offer ‘Threshold Concepts]],’” in Threshold Concepts and Transformational Learning, ed. Jan H. F. Meyer, Ray Land, & Catherine Baillie (Rotterdam: Sense Publications), 317-32.</ref>. Threshold concepts are the paradigm-shifting kinds of bottlenecks (Middendorf, 2025).

Shopkow, L., & Middendorf, J. (2019). CAUTION! THEORIES AT PLAY! Threshold concepts and Decoding the Disciplines. In J.A Timmermans & R. Land (Eds.) ''Threshold concepts on the edge.'' Leiden: Brill/Sense, pp. 37-50.

Middendorf, J (2025 in press). The Theory Bottleneck and Decoding the Disciplines. Die Hoschudt

Perkins, D. (2007). Theories of difficulty. In N. Entwistle, & P. Tomlinson (Eds.), ''Student learning and university teaching'' (pp. 31–48). Leicester: British Psychological Society.

== See also ==

* [[:Category:Threshold concept|List of publications related to Decoding and Treshold Concepts]]
* [https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/mflanaga/thresholds.html#spectop List of Threshold Concepts]

== References ==