27th July 2011

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
s.p.bates@ed.ac.uk
1

2. Inverting the physics 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
s.p.bates@ed.ac.uk
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. 7

8. 8

9. There are 2 problems:
• 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 of engagement,
possible loss of
confidence
• Strategic / shallow
learning, geared totally
towards passing exam
10

11. ‘Inverting the classroom’…
Is about 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’…
Is a 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. 15

17. Conceptual understanding
Despite high grades, 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 implicit curriculum
• 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 (from UBC 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
between 1st, 2nd and
4th year classes.
James Day and Doug Bonn
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 010114 (2011)
29

27. 30

30. Overview
• General premise
• Why we need to
• What we might do
– Lectures, self-study
34

31. Lectures
35

33. “ The complex cognitive 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
and Teaching strategy
‘Loanership’ of 3000 handsets
Wide range of disciplines
Science, Eng,Vet. Med.

39. “Although multiple choice questions 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 makes a
good question?
– Concept-testing
– Where known
misconceptions live
– Spread of answers
expected

41. “Electronic classroom response systems....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 Eric Mazur
(source “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube)

45. • The reduction in 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 first lecture 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 makes a good question ?
• How many to have each lecture ?
• Where to place it / them ?
• Beware shoe-horning content in

48. But does it work ?
53

49. Am. J. Phys. 66 1, January 1998
54

50. Reproduced from Eric Mazur
(search “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube)
55

51. Reproduced from Eric Mazur
(search “Confessions of a converted lecturer” on YouTube)
56

52. 1A 2008-09 Diag Test
45
40
35
30
Frequency
25 Pre
Post
20
15
10
5
0
Bin
57

53. 58

54. Self-study
59

55. The University of Edinburgh
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 MCQ repository 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. 63

59. 64

60. 65

61. 66

62. 67

63. 68

64. 69

65. 70

66. • To date
– 77 institutions
– 557 courses
– 33757 students have contributed
– 94207 questions have been written
– 2308854 answers have been submitted

67. PeerWise was introduced in workshop
sessions in Week 5
Students worked through
structured example task
and devised own Qs
in groups.
72

68. An assessment was set 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-
course assessment
Workshop Live Due
training
(class size of
~200)
350 questions
in total
~3500 answers
~2000 comments
74

70. 76

71. 77

72. Quality of submissions:
• Average quality was very good
• Few trivial questions / nonsense distracters
• Highest quality questions were EXCEPTIONALLY
good
78

73. 79

74. 80

75. 81

76. Student feedback
83

77. Positives
84

78. Does degree of PeerWise use correlate
with end of course performance?
Yes, for the majority of students
86

81. Summary
• Are we really 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
s.p.bates@ed.ac.uk
90