From video:~90% of students believe itIt is close to something that IS right Confirmation bias!
From: http://www.danpink.com/2010/11/the-3-rules-of-mindsets/Dweck’s broad argument is that what people believe shapes what they achieve — mostly irrespective of their innate talent. Some people, she says, have a fixed view of intelligence: They believe that intelligence is an entity, that we’re each endowed with a particular finite supply. Others have a growth view of intelligence: They believe that intelligence can expand through practice and effort.Your starting assumption about intelligence — your mindset, as she calls it in a popular book — heavily determines what you’re able to accomplish. And people with growth mindsets generally accomplish more and learn more deeply.In the lecture, Dweck set out three rules that nicely summarize the differences between the two mindsets along with quotations from students that demonstrate the rules.RULE #1Fixed mindset: Look clever at all costs. (“The main thing I want when I do my school work is to show how good I am at it.”)Growth mindset: Learn, learn, learn. (“It is much more important for me to learn things in my classes than it is to get the best grades.”)RULE #2Fixed mindset: It should come naturally. (“To tell you the truth, when I work hard at my school work it makes me fee like I’m not very smart.”)Growth mindset: Work hard, effort is key. (“The harder you work at something, the better you’ll be at it.”)RULE #3Fixed mindset: Hide your mistakes and conceal your deficiencies. (After a disappointing exam score, “I’d spend less time on this subject from now on. I’d try not to take this subject ever again, and I would try to cheat on the next test.”)Growth mindset: Capitalize on your mistakes and confront your deficiencies. (After a disappointing exam score, “I’d work harder in this class and spend more time studying for the tests.”)
“Learning technologies should be designed to increase, and not to reduce, the amount of personal contact between students and faculty on intellectual issues.”(Study Group on the Conditions of Excellencein American Higher Education, 1984)
About ~20 years ago, physics teachers began treating education as a research topic!Their findings were pretty grim"But the students do fine on my exams!“It appeared that students had been engaging in “surface learning” allowing them to solve problems algorithmically without actually understanding the concepts.
Was this just at Harvard (silly question)!Data from H.S., 2-year, 4-year, universities, etc.0.23 Hake gain on the FCI means that of the newtonian physics they could have learned in physics class, they learned 23% of it.Conclusion: Traditional physics lectures are all similarly (in)effective in improving conceptual understanding.
Enter Physics Education Research:An effort to find empirically tested ways to improve the situation.
Students had fragile knowledge from engaging in surface learningObviously this isn't what he thought he was teaching.Very “learner centered” moveClass time is now almost entirely focused on tackling tough conceptual questionsLater shifted to JiTT instead of reading quizzes
Carefully chosen questionsIdeally: 30-70% correct on first try)In 95% of cases, students “migrate” towards correct answer, often dramatically.Explanation and discussion by instructor follows the second “vote”, as necessary.In my class, participation is required (5% of final grade) but correctness is not required.
Is this just about new energy being put into an old class?(This is a difficult confounding factor in assessing new teaching techniques.)
Is this just about new energy being put into an old class?
Major caveat: Using classroom response system does not automatically bring these benefits. The method matters much more than the means.Hinde & Hunt: We survey 219 first-year business studies students tackling introductory economics, and find that the technology enhances learning in lectures because, among other things, it improves concentration, provides instantaneous and more effective student feedback, and allows students to make comparisons on how well they fare relative to their peers. Moreau, 2010: Overall, the experimental group scored higher on the posttest than the control group, and weak students in the experimental group made more improvement as measured by the posttest than similar ability students in the control groupPoirier & Feldman, 2007: There are reports of modest increases in exam grades when instructors use clickers to test concepts and probe opinions in large sections of introductory psychology .Anderson, et al. 2011: Compression (dropping topics that are well understood) based on group, or individual-level performance caused no decrease in learning compared to no compression.
Hinde & Hunt: We survey 219 first-year business studies students tackling introductory economics, and find that the technology enhances learning in lectures because, among other things, it improves concentration, provides instantaneous and more effective student feedback, and allows students to make comparisons on how well they fare relative to their peers. Moreau, 2010: Overall, the experimental group scored higher on the posttest than the control group, and weak students in the experimental group made more improvement as measured by the posttest than similar ability students in the control groupPoirier & Feldman, 2007: There are reports of modest increases in exam grades when instructors use clickers to test concepts and probe opinions in large sections of introductory psychology .Anderson, et al. 2011: Compression (dropping topics that are well understood) based on group, or individual-level performance caused no decrease in learning compared to no compression.
Changing Landscape of Teaching - SPS 4500 #1 - Jeff Loats
THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF TEACHING
PART I – ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT
DR. JEFF LOATS
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
SPS 4500 , SEPT 26THTH, 2013
• Who you are
• What kind of teaching you are doing
• Is teaching a part of your future plans?
WARM-UP: BORN VS. MADE
"I've had great teachers and awful teachers... the
whole spectrum.The ones that are great seem
to have a natural knack for it while others seem
to have been born clueless about how to teach.
I'm not sure there will ever be teaching methods
that will make a bad teacher into a good one."
What is your response?
WARM-UP: BORN VS. MADE
~22% → Agree that teaching quality is
~44% → Improvement is a matter of desire,
effort and time spent.
~22% → Mismatch of learning styles
ASIDE: LEARNING STYLES
“Not every student's learning style is going to match
every teacher's teaching style. It is possible that the
teachers you thought were bad just had a different
teaching style that didn't work for you.You should talk
to teachers that you think are bad and see if they can
try to incorporate your learning style into their class.”
• “The Myth of Learning Styles”
by Cedar Riener and Daniel Willingham
• YouTube: Learning Styles Don’t Exist
• Scholarly review: “Learning styles: Concepts and
evidence”, Pashler et al, 2008
WARM-UP: BORN VS. MADE
“Some teachers are naturally better at interacting or
captivating a group of people but I believe that
teaching skills can be learned by anyone who is willing
to put in the effort. A teacher must be self aware and
willing to take feedback to improve. Classically "bad"
teachers are a product of a problem, perhaps they did
not receive teaching specific education but more
“I would agree. Some teachers are better than other.
However, the best way to learn is from each other.”
Can you think of areas in your own life where you
have a fixed or growth mindset?
A) I can’t think of an example of either
B) I can think of a fixed mindset example
C) I can think of a growth mindset example
D) I can think of an example of each
WARM-UP: LECTURE TIME
Out of an average 60 minutes of class time,
roughly how many minutes of class time are
spent on lecture-based delivery of content?
“[…] Now that I am taking program specific
classes the style of teaching varies quite a bit. I
think their methods and attitudes come from
their experience in the field. I think they teach
this way because they are preparing us to be
“I believe that traditional ways of teaching
continues, even though it may not be the most
effective, because educators fear that new
forms of teaching may be difficult to do and
might result in student failure.”
“They do not all use an interactive approach, but
most have, which is quite nice. I would have to
think that they teach the way they do because
they know it works.Those who just lecture the
whole time might not be totally into it, despite
being professionals of their field, and that is why
they teach the way they do. A lot of people are
WARM-UP: BIGGEST “TAKE AWAY”
What was the biggest "take away" idea that you
got from the article?
~66% → Engagement is key and
Lecture performs poorly
~11% → Training can trump experience
~11% → Change is needed
~11% → No single technique is the “trick”
~11% → Creative classes already do this
~11% → Not all classes can use this
WARM-UP: BIGGEST “TAKE AWAY”
“Active leaning is nothing new; however, the
research in the article failed to test creative or
“The biggest idea that I got from this article is
that engaging students is not only important but
can be done by teachers without expertise in the
“Not one teaching style alone did the trick,
better outcomes occurred when "deliberate
practice" was utilized.”
WARM-UP: BIGGEST “TAKE AWAY”
“I feel that it is only a matter of time before we
drasticly change our teaching methods.We
know longer need to train young people to
complete tasks for factory work so we should
revamp our teaching styles. ”
“Of course I do not see how a more interactive
approach could work in all classes. A history
class might not have that option.”
What kind of experience do you have with
clickers or another classroom response system in
an educational setting?
A) I’ve never used them in any way
B) I’ve used them as a learner
C) I’ve used them as a teaching tool
D) I’ve used as both a learner and a teacher
Technology is not an educational panacea
Seek tools that offer new approaches
As always, let evidence guide our attention
PHYSICS EDUCATION REVOLUTION
Eric Mazur, Physicist at Harvard:
MAZUR’S PERSONAL REVOLUTION
(added) Pre-class reading, enforced
(removed) Nearly all “watch me do this”
portions of class: sample problems,
(modified) Lecture broken up into small bites
(added) Depth over coverage
(added) ConceptTests with Peer Instruction
Multiple choice questions
1. Students answer Individually
2. Discussion with peers
3. Students answer post-discussion
4. Class-wide discussion
Students have developed a robot dog
and a robot cat, both of which can
run at 8 mph and walk at 4 mph.
A the end of the term, there is a race!
The robot cat must run for half of its
racing time, then walk.
The robot dog must run for half the
racing distance, then walk.
Which one wins the race?
A) Robot cat B) Robot dog C) They tie
THE EVIDENCE STANDARD
Quick/easy attendance in large class sizes.
Provides anonymity (Banks, 2006).
Every student participates (Banks, 2006).
Encourages active learning (Martyn, 2007).
THE EVIDENCE STANDARD
Improved concentration (Hinde & Hunt, 2006)
Improved learning and retention
Improved exam scores (Poirier & Feldman, 2007)
Efficient use of class time
(Anderson, et al. 2011).
STUDENT FEEDBACK ON CLICKERS
315 students in 7 classes over 4 terms (roughly ±6%)
Rated on 5 point scale (strongly disagree to agree)
The use of iClickers, and activities
that used them have…
…helped me to stay more engaged
in class than I would otherwise be.
…helped me to learn the material
better than I otherwise would
…been worth the cost to buy them 78%
Classroom response systems can be integrated
into most teaching styles and disciplines to good
From an evidence-based perspective, classroom
response systems addresses often-neglected
As with all reforms, be prepared to find that
students know less than we might hope.
For yourself… or to share next week
What was the biggest shift in your thinking
during this discussion?
What is the biggest question you feel needs
more attention from the discussion?
Contact Dr. Loats: Jeff.Loats@gmail.com
Today’s slides: www.slideshare.net/JeffLoats
CLICKER REFERENCES & RESOURCES
Banks, D.A. (Ed.). (2006). Audience response systems in higher
education:Applications and cases. Hershey, PA: Information
Hinde, K., & Hunt,A. (2006). Using the personal response
system to enhance student learning: Some evidence from
teaching economics. In Banks, D.A. (Ed.),Audience Response
Systems in Higher Education:Applications and Cases. Hershey,
PA: Information Science Publishing.
Martyn, M. (2007). Clickers in the classroom: An active learning
approach. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 30(2), 71-74.
Moreau, N.A. (2010). Do clickers open minds? Use of a
questioning strategy in developmental mathematics,CAPELLA
UNIVERSITY, 2010, 157 pages; 3389211
Poirier,C. R., & Feldman, R. S. (2007). Promoting active learning
using individual response technology in large introductory
psychology classes.Teaching of Psychology, 34(3), 194-196.
Mazur, E. 2004 ”Introduction to Peer Instruction” talk presented
at New Physics & Astronomy FacultyWorkshop, 2004, UMD.
Hake, R.R. 1998a. “Interactive-engagement vs traditional
methods:A six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data
for introductory physics courses,” Am. J. Phys. 66(1): 64-74;
Anderson, L., Healy,A., Kole, J., & Bourne, L. (2011). Conserving
time in the classroom: the clicker technique.The Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(8): 1457-1462.
ThoughtQuestions: A NewApproach to Using Clickers
CU Science Education Initiative & UBC Science Education
Clicker Resource Guide from the CU Science Education Initiative
& UBC Science Education Initiative
Duncan, D. (2009).Tips for Successful “Clicker” Use. Retrieved
January 31, 2009.
WhyAre Clicker Questions HardToCreate?
Blog post by Ian Beatty, Science Education Researcher and
Professor of Physics at the University of NorthCarolina at
Good resource list at Carleton College’s website: