Flip the Classroom in ELT: Gimmick or Revolution

828 views

Published on

Is the current movement to "flip the classroom" an important revolution or a trendy gimmick? Don Hinkelman and Goh Kawaii present their views from a Japan perspective in the field of English Language Teaching (ELT). In the overview of flipped teaching, many images borrowed from other presentations.

Published in: Education
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
828
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Flip the Classroom in ELT: Gimmick or Revolution

  1. 1. CALL-Plus Workshop 2013 Flip the Classroom Gimmick or Revolution? Don Hinkelman! Goh Kawai
  2. 2. Did you flip today? ❖ Raise your hand if you finished the quiz.! ❖ What is flip the classroom?! ❖ Who popularized it?! ❖ How does it work?! ❖ What is the role of the teacher?! ❖ Is it a gimmick or revolution?! ❖ All quizzes go into this box. At the end of today’s session, we will choose three. Three of us will receive this book as your prize.! ❖ Bergmann and Sams: two high school chemistry teachers in Colorado, USA wrote this book which popularized the model called “Flipped Classrooms”
  3. 3. First Impressions of Flipped Classrooms
  4. 4. Types, Models and Definitions of Flipped Teaching
  5. 5. http://usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/the-flipped-classroom-model-a-full-picture/ Gerstein (2013)
  6. 6. Don wonders... Does this “flip” model apply to foreign language learning?
  7. 7. What does the “flip” model have to do with language learning theories? Three Major Theories/Metaphors of Language Learning (Gruba & Hinkelman, 2012) 1. Language learning happens through instruction (Bahlsen) pre-70s Language learning happens through acquisition (Krashen, Ellis) 70s, 80s, 90s Language learning happens through participation (Vygotsky, Lantolf, Kramsch) 2000s
  8. 8. “Flip the Classroom” is not a theory, but for EFL, it is an integration of three major theories/metaphors of language learning Instruction Acquisition Participation Emphasis Language! (structure & content)! Words, phrases, grammar, patterns,! pronunciation Strategies! (skills & affectives)! Clarifications, circumlocutions, ... Acts! (roles & projects)! Community/ classroom communicative needs Action Lecture, Presentation, Reading, Movies Discussion, Role Plays, Pairwork Exchange events, Conferences, Demonstrations, Gamified Simulations Timing Asynchronous Synchronous Synchronous Grouping Individual Group Group Home Flip Classroom Flip
  9. 9. Flipped teaching and Blended Learning Theory Also known as Variation Theory (Oliver & Trigwell, 2005)! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes pedagogic actions! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes synchronicity! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes spaces! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes groupings! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes media! ❖ Optimal language learning mixes tools
  10. 10. Goh asks... Why do we want to flip? ❖ Don gave us an overview of the flipped classroom! ❖ Okay ... so what's new? how can we teach better?
  11. 11. Goh's interests (a) why flip, (b) how to flip, (c) how flipping differs from prior techniques, (d) what resources are absolutely necessary versus preferred but non-essential, (e) how much extra preparation, instruction, and follow up are involved, (f) how much material can be recycled, and how much is new each time, (g) how we can learn to flip better, (h) how team teaching helps flip, (i) how to determine whether we're flipping effectively, and (j) how to convince learners and colleagues ! Do you share my interests? Don will shed light on them from 10 angles.
  12. 12. Mythbusters Don will give us 10 critiques of flipping. How many are serious issues? myths? Half-truths?
  13. 13. Ten Critiques of the Flip the Classroom Model 1. Flipping is nothing new.   Flipping will not work in my school. Flipping emphasizes direct instruction.   Flipping is not practical.   Flipping is time-consuming. Flipping is only good for high level students. Flipping is good for teaching science. Flipping appeals to administration. Flipping is goofing off. Flipping works by itself.
  14. 14. 1. Flipping is nothing new• Good teachers have always done this approach. ! Paper-based homework is a common practice, not videos ! In Japan, many teachers do quizzes at the start of class, covering homework preparation assigned the day before. ! Experience: - Very true! But often a forgotten practice that needs revival - Flipping is enhanced with video technology and interactive quizzes, forums online
  15. 15. 2. Flipping will not work in my school! ! Flipping works in ideal school situations   Our students do not do homework. ! “I tried it once and it completely flopped” ! Experience: - Immediate socialization is required. - Flipping works in every school
  16. 16. 3. Flipping emphasizes direct instruction ! ! Direct instruction through videos is just recycling traditional methods of teaching. ! Experience: - True for half of the flip. The flipped individual work at home is indeed direct instruction, such as lectures. - The flipped group work in class is not direct instruction. It is activities such as discussion, pairwork, cooperative work
  17. 17. 4. Flipping is not practical ! Some students will be ready, some not. ! Hard to start a class with everyone at the same point. ! Experience: - Immediate socialization is required. - Habitual preparation is possible.
  18. 18. 5. Flipping is time- consuming! ! Flipping requires teachers to learn screencasting and other technical skills.  Where is the time for that? ! Experience: - Very true. But every re-assessment, improvement, change of ways, and sharing of ways takes time. - Flipped videos are initially time-consuming both in production and in consensus-making (aligning teachers’ aims) - Flipped teaching saves lots of time in subsequent cycles of instruction.
  19. 19. 6. Flipping is only good for high-level students! ! Flipping is only good for high level students. ! High-level students are willing to do homework. ! Experience: - In the USA, flipping was started to help the failing students. Failure rates dropped from 31% to 12% in one case. - Flipping works for every level of student.
  20. 20. 7. Flipping is only good for science classes! ! Flipping is good for teaching science, but not for foreign languages.  [the originators of this model, Bergmann and Sams, were chemistry teachers ! Experience: - Foreign language learning also needs preparation. Students need to learn vocabulary, grammar, and context. - Content/Structure prep gives more time for strategy development and project development.
  21. 21. 8. Flipping appeals to administrators ! Flipping fits administrative goals of standardisation and accountability.  How about independence, flexibility and individualisation? ! Experience: - In Japanese universities, instructors are far too independent, and often disguise laziness or fear of change with a plea for independence and academic freedom. - Flipping forces teachers to agree on goals and create materials that reflect those goals.
  22. 22. 9. Flipping is goofing off Prima facie: "teachers make kids watch videos, and teachers watch kids do drills" ! Problem: Classroom instruction appears on the surface that teachers are merely watching over kids doing their exercises (which is what coaching from the sidelines should look like). Ironically, this looks too easy and sloppy. ! Goal: Understand the care needed to flip, and the value that flipping provides. ! Solution: Team teaching. (a) Transparency justifies flip learning. (b) Disseminates the technique.
  23. 23. 10. Flipping works by itself Myth: Preparing outside of class enriches interaction in class. ! Truth: More benefit is derived when teachers monitor or comment on preparation before classes begin. ! Technique: Knowing before class what kids are capable of facilitates giving pin-point individualized instruction. Some kids write and talk well in asynchronous online settings, but perform poorly in real-time face to face interactions (stage fright). By knowing each kid's potential, we reassure students that we know what they can do, and help demonstrate their skills.
  24. 24. Case 1: Hokkaido University Blended Flip ❖ Students write and say phrases online before coming to class. ❖ 40 minutes of online preparation per class. ❖ Students say their phrases in class. ❖ TA-to-student ratio is about 1:3. ❖ Prepare and thrive. Don't and die.
  25. 25. Case 2: Hokkaido University TA Flip ❖ TAs read and hear our students' language production online before coming to class. ❖ TAs know what each student is capable of. ❖ TAs help students based on what they (are trying to) say. ❖ TAs push kids out of their comfort zone.
  26. 26. Case 3: Sapporo Gakuin University Blended LMS Quizzes Flip First Year Curriculum at SGU! Quizzes before each class, ten questions in Moodle LMS! ❖ Stage 1: Quizzes prepared and distributed on LMS (100%)! ❖ Stage 2: Teachers assigning the quizzes (95%) ! ❖ Stage 3: Getting students oriented to the quizzes (60%)! ❖ Stage 4: Regular completion before class (no data, perhaps 10%)! ❖ Stage 5: Assessing quality of homework, impact on teaching (no data, cannot speculate at this point)
  27. 27. Case 4: Sapporo Gakuin University Journal Writing Flip ❖ Students do daily free writing in paper journals (100 words x 7) 60% ❖ Students tabulate words and self-assess on a “Checksheet” 80% ❖ First 15 minutes of class is exchanging journals among classmates and writing comments. 90%
  28. 28. Case 5: Sapporo Gakuin University Extensive Reading Flip ❖ Students read books outside of class (27,000 words/semester) 100% ❖ Students take quizzes to verify that they have read the book 95% pass rate ❖ Use class time to give book report speeches 70%
  29. 29. Case 6: Your Institution ❖ How is the flip model happening in your school? (consciously or unconsciously)! ❖ How have you been flipping your classroom? (consciously or unconsciously)! ❖ Find a partner or two to share your experiences! ❖ Report an example briefly with the whole group
  30. 30. Conclusion 1: Flip the Classroom is a Gimmick ❖ Good teachers have been using this approach! ❖ Long history of use in Japan ! ❖ The media (video or paper) is irrelevant in the approach! ❖ Video improves (not transforms) the homework! ❖ appeals to multiple learning styles! ❖ simulates real-world contexts
  31. 31. Conclusion 2: Flip the Classroom is a Revolution ❖ Flipping is a (good) excuse for systematic transformation of a curriculum and collaborative development! ❖ Flipping puts materials authoring in the hands of teachers ! ❖ Collaborative authoring forces transparency of aims and assessment! ❖ Greater individualisation of instruction is possible
  32. 32. Conclusion 3: Flip the Classroom is Neither a Gimmick nor a Revolution ❖ Flipping is a time-honored, effective technique.! ❖ CALL facilitates flipping more than videos, especially when the learners' production is monitored before class.! ❖ Team teaching justifies and disseminates the technique.! ❖ I was flipping before I knew the term. Maybe you too.
  33. 33. References ❖ Bergmann, J. & Sams, A. (2012). Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. International Society for Technology in Education. ❖ Berrett, D. (2012, February 19). How ‘flipping’ the classroom can improve the traditional lecture. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/How-Flipping-the- Classroom/130857/ ❖ Frederickson, N., Reed, P., & Clifford, V. (2005). Evaluating web-supported learning versus lecture-based teaching: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 50(4), 645-664. ❖ Gerstein, J. (2013) The flipped classroom model: A full picture. User Generated Eduction: http:// usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/the-flipped-classroom-model-a-full-picture/ ❖ Gojak, L. (2012, October). To Flip or Not to Flip: That is Not the Question! National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/about/content.aspx?id=34585 ❖ Gruba, P. & Hinkelman, D. (2012). Blending technologies in second language classrooms. London: Palgrave-MacMillan. ❖ Kennedy, C. & Levy, M. (2009). Sustainability and CALL: Factors for success in a context of change. Computer-Assisted Language Learning 22(5): 445-463. ❖ King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30-35. http://www. edweek.org/ew/ articles/2012/10/03/06khan_ep.h32.html ❖ Oliver, M. & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can 'blended learning' be redeemed? E-Learning, 2(1), 17-26. ❖ Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93, 223-231.

×