Uploaded bySimon Bates
Bates inverted classroom
The document discusses inverting the traditional classroom model by moving more active learning activities, like problem-solving, into the classroom and assigning lectures and initial content acquisition as pre-class work. It argues this approach better supports deep learning and conceptual understanding. Specific strategies discussed include using clicker questions during lectures to promote engagement, peer instruction, and the student-generated question platform PeerWise to facilitate self-study. Research evidence is presented suggesting inverted models can improve learning outcomes in physics education.
More Related Content
Similar to Bates inverted classroom
Bates inverted classroom
- 1. Inverting the classroom Why we need to and how you might go about it Simon Bates Dean of Learning and Teaching Professor of Physics Education College of Science and Engineering School of Physics & Astronomy [email protected] 1
- 2. Inverting the physicsclassroom Why we need to and how you might go about it Simon Bates Dean of Learning and Teaching Professor of Physics Education College of Science and Engineering School of Physics & Astronomy [email protected] 2
- 3. Disclaimer ! Source :http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u46190/caution.jpg 3
- 4. Overview • General premise • Why we need to • What we might do 4
- 5. Overview • General premise • Why we need to • What we might do 5
- 6. Learning in phases Acquisition - reading, listening, lectures etc. Assimilation - making meaning, connections, practice, discussion, integrating …. 6
- 7.
- 8.
- 9. There are 2problems: • We spend much class contact time in activities towards the bottom • We provide most access to expert help and guidance during class hours 9
- 10. Consequences: • Lack ofengagement, possible loss of confidence • Strategic / shallow learning, geared totally towards passing exam 10
- 11. ‘Inverting the classroom’… Isabout making more time for more cognitively demanding tasks in class hours And / or About finding new ways to engage & support participants outside class hours. 11
- 12. ‘Inverting the classroom’… Isa long term strategic change process - We’re at about 5 on a scale of 1-10. - And coverage is patchy 12
- 13. Overview • General premise • Why we need to – Maths, concepts, data-handling, self-study • What we might do 13
- 15.
- 17. Conceptual understanding Despite highgrades, often large deficits in conceptual understanding in e.g. Newtonian Mechanics Electricity and magnetism Scientific thinking ….. 19
- 18. Force Concept Inventory … a mature, established diagnostic test. 20
- 19. Labs: the implicitcurriculum • In practical work, we expect students to acquire data analysis skills in parallel to practical abilities. • Frequently, these important skills are not explicitly taught and not effectively assessed. HEA Phys Sci Centre Development Project 2009-10 21
- 20. Typical question (fromUBC pre-prototype) 23
- 21. A! 24
- 22. B! 25
- 23. C! 26
- 24. D! 27
- 25. A! B! C! D! 28
- 26. No statistically significant difference between1st, 2nd and 4th year classes. James Day and Doug Bonn Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 010114 (2011) 29
- 27.
- 30. Overview • General premise • Why we need to • What we might do – Lectures, self-study 34
- 31. Lectures 35
- 33. “ The complexcognitive skills required to understand Physics cannot be developed by listening to lectures… … any more than one can learn to play tennis by watching tennis matches.” Hestenes, D. Am. J. Phys., 66, 465-7 (1998)
- 34. • A “clicker”,a.k.a. – An Electronic Voting System – A Personal Response System – An Audience Response System
- 38. Underpinned College Learning andTeaching strategy ‘Loanership’ of 3000 handsets Wide range of disciplines Science, Eng,Vet. Med.
- 39. “Although multiple choicequestions may seem limiting, they can be surprisingly good at generating the desired student engagement and guiding student thinking. They work particularly well if the possible answers embody common confusions or difficult ideas.” Wieman, C. and Perkins K., Physics Today (2005) 36-42.
- 40. • What makesa good question? – Concept-testing – Where known misconceptions live – Spread of answers expected
- 41. “Electronic classroom responsesystems....are merely tools, not a 'magic bullet'. To significantly impact student learning (they) must be employed with skill in the service of a sound, coherent pedagogy. This is not easy.” Beatty, I.D., Gerace, W.J., Leonard, W.J., Dufresne, R.J., Am. J. Phys 2006
- 43. • Peer Instruction – Question – Individual poll – Students discuss – Repoll
- 44. Reproduced from EricMazur (source “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube)
- 45. • The reductionin coverage – Departure from the A-Z content transmission – The A-Z must be elsewhere (pre-reading, web, tutorial…) – The students must buy-in to “the learning contract”
- 46. • The firstlecture is crucial – Why we are doing this – What we expect of them – Practice use with friendly questions • There is a learning curve – This is not an “out of the box” solution – Whole-team buy-in
- 47. • What makesa good question ? • How many to have each lecture ? • Where to place it / them ? • Beware shoe-horning content in
- 48. But does itwork ? 53
- 49. Am. J. Phys.66 1, January 1998 54
- 50. Reproduced from EricMazur (search “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube) 55
- 51. Reproduced from EricMazur (search “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube) 56
- 52. 1A 2008-09 DiagTest 45 40 35 30 Frequency 25 Pre Post 20 15 10 5 0 Bin 57
- 53.
- 54. Self-study 59
- 55. The University ofEdinburgh Edinburgh, Scotland 5th July, 2010 PeerWise bridging the gap between online learning and social media Paul Denny Department of Computer Science The University of Auckland New Zealand
- 56. • Web-based MCQrepository built by students • Students: – develop new questions with associated explanations – answer existing questions and rate them for quality and difficulty – take part in discussions – compete with other students to appear on leaderboards
- 57. Student familiarity with Web 2.0 The energy and Student creativity of a generated large class questions
- 58.
- 59.
- 60.
- 61.
- 62.
- 63.
- 64.
- 65.
- 66. • To date – 77 institutions – 557 courses – 33757 students have contributed – 94207 questions have been written – 2308854 answers have been submitted
- 67. PeerWise was introducedin workshop sessions in Week 5 Students worked through structured example task and devised own Qs in groups. 72
- 68. An assessment wasset for the end of Week 6: Minimum requirements: • Write one question • Answer 5 • Comment on & rate 3 Contributed ~3% to course assessment 73
- 69. Uptake for in- courseassessment Workshop Live Due training (class size of ~200) 350 questions in total ~3500 answers ~2000 comments 74
- 70.
- 71.
- 72. Quality of submissions: • Average quality was very good • Few trivial questions / nonsense distracters • Highest quality questions were EXCEPTIONALLY good 78
- 73.
- 74.
- 75.
- 76.
- 77. Positives 84
- 78. Does degree ofPeerWise use correlate with end of course performance? Yes, for the majority of students 86
- 81. Summary • Are wereally making the best use of precious lecture / contact time? • Are there more effective and efficient ways that we can engage and support students outside class time? 89
- 82. EdPER group website bit.ly/EdPER Talk slides on Slideshare EdPER_talks [email protected] 90