Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Flipping the Classroom vs Traditional Lecture



Sorry I sent this out with the wrong subject header!

Kieran Mathieson wrote on the POD list:

Mazur's work is not really representative of what flipped normally means. The idea behind flipped:

- There are two main components of most classes: (1) students listening/watching someone explain something, and (2) students practicing, e.g., working through problems.

- Traditional classes have students listening/watching in a face-to-face class, and practicing on their own outside of class (homework).

- Flipped courses have students listening/watching/reading on their own outside of class, and practicing in a face-to-face class, or other synchronous way.

My variant on this is that the independent, outside-of-class work also includes many exercises, with formative feedback. See http://coredogs.com/article/tale-two-students for a short story. I've been running courses this way for a few years.

Recently, I've started working on http://flippedtextbook.com, tools for helping other people write textbooks (or chapters, modules, whatever) that support this model.

Kieran


In 1995 I wrote:
When I started cooperative groups in my large introductory course.
My student evaluation plummeted. It took me years to get it right in a
student-centered approach.
We called it a student-centred approach then not a flipped classroom.
I kept working on getting it right because the
students who used to be turned off in my introductory physics course were
being turned on. It was the traditional science students who objected and
they learned just as well in either approach.

I do expect is that my students come to class having read the material...
they dont

It took me a while to get this one right too. Thanks to suggestions from
my wife, I adopted a "writing to learn" approach where the students have
to write on the topics to be covered in class in advance of the class.
This is the keystone of my approach. I have students metacognitively deal with the material in the textbook before coming to class. See
Enhancing Students' Understanding Of Concepts By Getting Students to
Approach Text in The Manner of a Hermeneutical Circle
Calvin S. Kalman (Published online 5 September 2010).
DOI: 10.1007/s11191-010-9298-z
Science & Education: 20(2), 159–172, 2011.
&
Students Perceptions of Reflective Writing as a Tool for Exploring an
Introductory Textbook.
Calvin S. Kalman, Mark Aulls, Shelley Rohar and John Godley
Journal of College Science Teaching March/April 2008 37(3),74-81


The problem
As one of my colleagues (a former chair of math!) pointed out this
morning many of us love to be the centre of attention. It is very hard to
let go and let the students have their say without rushing in to correct
them. Facilating discussion after group work is not simply making
brilliant points for the students to respond to. Then again groups can't
simply be formed and set to task. Students have to be groomed to work
together and then encouraged over and over.

The students cannot work in groups.
Even with grooming some groups will be dysfunctional. So you have
to get feedback from the groups. Then meet with the problem groups. Gee it
was so easy to just dust off the old notes and glance at them before class.

I agree.... I don't TEACH!!!!
Nowadays my students seem to think I do and are happy with the
student-centred approach. Keep experimenting until you get the right
approach. Little things seem to matter. In my advanced courses, I start
group work right away, but in the intro couse, for my classes it seems to
be inportant to wait two weeks until the course change period is over, the
class has settled down and the class has adjusted to my style.
I should point out that results are best if you follow up by having students do writing assignments outside of the classroom:
Enhancing conceptual change using argumentative essays
Calvin S. Kalman, Shelley Rohar and David Wells
Am. J. Phys 72, 715-717, 2004.



Best wishes

Calvin


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Dr. Calvin S. Kalman P. Phys. Phone: (514) 848-2424 xt 3284
_/ Professor,Department of Physics Fax: (514) 848-2828
_/ Principal, Science College
_/ Concordia University
_/ Montreal, QC H4B 1R6 Calvin.Kalman@concordia.ca
_/
_/ Also Adjunct Professor Department of Educational
_/ and Counseling Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec
_/
_/
_/ homepage- http://physics.concordia.ca/faculty/ckalman.php
_/
_/ Editor-in-Chief book series Science & Engineering Education Sources
_/ http://www.infoagepub.com/series/Science-Engineering-Education-Sources
_/
_/ See
_/ Successful Science and Engineering Teaching in Colleges and Universities
_/ at
_/ http://www.josseybass.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1933371161.html
_/ See review found in the Journal of Chemical Education Oct. 2007:
_/ http://tinyurl.com/2rt7tj
_/
_/ For the research behind this book see:
_/ "Successful Science and Engineering Teaching: Theoretical and Learning
_/ Perspectives (Innovation and Change in Professional Education)"
_/ at
_/ http://tinyurl.com/3qn237
_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_//_/_/




_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l