3. Ethan Yazzie-Mintz, “Charting the Path from
Engagement to Achievement: A Report on the
2009 High School Survey of Student Engagement”.
4. Student Expectations …
Elliot Washor and Charles Mojkowski , Leaving to
Learn: How Out-of-School Learning Increases
Student Engagement and Reduces Dropout Rates.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2013
5. Flipped Learning
Sams, Aaron & Bennett, Brian, “The truth about
flipped learning”, eSchool News, May 31, 2012
“Ultimately, flipped learning is
not about flipping the “when and
where” instruction is delivered;
it’s about flipping the attention
away from the teacher and
toward the learner.”
6. Prepare
ApplyConfirm
Explore
ExplainApply
PAC Model
EEA Model
Dennis W. Sunal, “The Learning cycle” A
Comparison of Models of Strategies for Conceptual
Reconstruction: A Review of the Literature,”
Flipped Models
digital foundations
small class
Prepare – videos
Apply – entry activity
– learning activities
– exit activities
Confirm - project
8. Results
survey
“I prefer this type of
class to traditional
lecture”
“I like how the teacher is
getting us more involved. It
makes the class understand
better”
“I like that the videos
are in depth and …
easy to access”
“the lessons cater to
multiple learning
styles”
I had a problem. The students I expected (and had experienced) in my classroom weren’t there anymore! They changed! I’m not sure what really happened to them … maybe technology, maybe a different type of schooling, maybe a sense of entitlement … whatever the case, what I had been doing quite happily for many year, just wasn’t working anymore!
I narrowed it down to three types of students…
ROB – when he does come he’s not engaged in class … physically there but only really does what he needs to do to get by … STRATEGIC learner
ALEX – regularly attends … things come at him pretty quickly doesn’t really get it … memorizes things just before test … SURFACE learner
DIANNE – capable student who attends regularly … has the ability and tries hard but really doesn’t understand without concrete examples … forced to be a STRATEGIC learner
I made it my goal to do three things to help these students…
improve student engagement by using a dynamic, interactive learning environment
increase students’ accountability for their own learning by using peer-supported learning
improve students’ depth of learning by using authentic and relevant applications
In my research I found a 2009 student engagement survey of over 42,000 high school students in the states. When asked to identify how much different teaching methods engaged them, this is what they found …
It’s interesting that the methods involving projects and working with peers are most engaging, and the methods that most of us were taught with and tend to be our own “fall-back” methods, are the ones that the students are least engaged by!
Washor and Mojkowski identified 10 expectations that students have of school … contribute to student-centred and engaging learning environment
I, in my naivety, thought that I had masterminded the ideal way to address these challenges, and even called it flipping my classroom. I very quickly discovered that it was that moment in time where synchronicity kicks in and flipping was beginning to find its way into classrooms everywhere.
Although not truly the originator of the flipped class, Aaron Sams and Jonathan Bergmann, high school chemistry teachers in Colorado, are considered to be the pioneers. Many educators believe flipping is simply recording lectures for students to watch outside of class time, and using class time for tutorials type learning. This quote by Sams and Bennett (a high school science teacher who now works for TechSmith … Camtasia people) express it a little bit differently … moving attention away from us as teacher, and focusing on the student and the learning.
There are two common implementation models for flipping a classroom. The first is based on Dennis Sunal’s Learning cycle where students PREPARE for learning, APPLY new knowledge, and then CONFIRM that knowledge in some culminating activity. In the flipped model, student have their first exposure to content OUTSIDE of class. The concepts are applied in an active in-class learning environment, and then reviewed through application or reflection outside of class.
The 2nd model is a modification of the first. The first exposure to the content comes in-class in the form of a guided exploration. The explanation of topics is explored outside of class time (usually through video or readings), followed by an interactive application of the concepts IN class.
Over the last academic year I set out to flip my first year digital electronics course. Similar to the NAND to Tetris model presented in The Elements of Computing Systems, the course covers the progression from NAND gate to processor, and everything in between.
I have a small class, capped at 30, so this presented a perfect opportunity to implement a flipped classroom and compare the results to those of a traditional delivery. I chose the Prepare-Apply-Confirm model. Students prepared for class by watching a number of 5-15 minute videos (created by me) that either summarized a new concept or provide worked examples.
The application happened in a 3 hour class that was scheduled from 2 to 5 p.m. It normally began with an entry activity such as a peer-marked quiz that review the content in the preparation. The learning activities, done in randomly selected groups, were broken into chunks that were achievable in 20-30 minutes. After each chunk the class reconvened to review the concept and ensure there were no misdirected ideas. This process continued until the last 15-20 minutes which was reserved for an individual exit activity … normally a marked quiz.
There were no scheduled breaks, with students self-regulating their need for coffee and/or bio breaks.
With three such diverse goals, I chose to measure ENGAGEMENT through a student survey. I asked four simple questions:
what could the teacher do differently
what could the teacher do more of
what could the teacher do less of
what could each student do differently or better
I measured student ACCOUNTABILITY by observation. I monitored their level of participation, the quality of the material they presented for class discussion, and their participation in class reviews and reflections.
I used results of midterms and exams to measure DEEP LEARNING. For years I have been designing tests that identify questions according to cognitive levels, and recording student grades for each question, so had access to a data base of traditional learning results for both lower and higher order thinking skills questions.
The feedback received on the student survey, indicated that they were engaged by the flipped learning environment. They appreciated the change to actively participate in their own learning, and even recognized that it helped different learners in different ways.
students actively participated – limited time to complete tasks; knowledge that random group(s) would be selected to present their findings; end of day three hour class … often stayed after to continue work
Overall improvement in most areas anywhere from 6 to 28% … slight decrease in application and analysis on fall midterm
slight shift in grade distribution in fall, more significant improvement in winter
Deep learning … application and integration of knowledge in project course. Saw an overall upward shift in grades
The study, as small as it was, showed improved student engagement, an indication that students were accountable for their own learning, and a reasonable improvement in depth of learning.
