1. A pilot study in a large enrolment
introductory science course
Expert-guided crowdsourced
learning content
Simon Bates
simon.bates@ubc.ca
@simonpbates
bit.ly/batestalks
4. Context - flipped classrooms
CC BY-NC 2.0 https://flic.kr/p/f3ynHx
Derek Bruff: Class time reconsidered
http://prezi.com/donq036eunko/class-time-reconsidered/
5. Weekly rhythm for our 1A class
Poh,
M.Z.,
Swenson,
N.C.,
Picard,
R.W.,
"A
Wearable
Sensor
for
Unobtrusive,
Long-‐term
Assessment
of
Electrodermal
AcEvity,"
IEEE
TransacEons
on
Biomedical
Engineering,
vol.57,
no.5,
pp.1243-‐1252,
May
2010.
doi:
10.1109/TBME.2009.2038487
10. 1
2
3
A ball initially at rest is
thrown upwards, comes
back down & is caught
!
Which of the following is a
plausible graph of the
acceleration of the ball
with time?
11.
12.
13. Freeman et al PNAS www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Wieman commentary PNAS
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1407304111
“This meta-analysis makes a powerful case that any college or university that is teaching its
STEM courses by traditional lectures is providing an inferior education to its students”
20. Typical implementation
Minimum participation requirements for each
of two assessment exercises (PW1, PW2)
Write 1 Answer 5 Rate / comment 3
5% course credit
Physics 101, Energy & Waves
Winter Semester: 3 sections, 791 students
21. Scaffolding
TOCCLT'.'
-
QestIsct
How 1o...
q/t4osTer
Submit ond onswer questions
on topics in lhe torget region,
just obove lhe physics
you hove olreody mostered.
Dislroclers
) l*"*"ò
rNrrltng
Ih s region corrk:ins llte
plrysics knowledgo ond colrco¡ls
you connol leorn yel
becouse the louncalions
crrc nol in plocc
PHYSICS TOPICS IN YOUR TARG T REGION
buo'5ot't1 'Den¡¡lu
B¿:ovvì 1 J
F:rcq - YOUR CHOSEN TOPIC
à..
auC'q^ x@
bôo'osro
pn ro, d logroo,
o 9tS
COMMON MISCONCEPÎIONS AND ERRORS
(Sec hHÞ:/jÞhy¡.udofo¡.cdu/CJP/trêconcoÞllo¡t.pdt
tor o llil ol common mhconcepllons)
¿K N(,qht %cce Açxs no exi¡þ
, c.rrrçrJ On oblec'-t 5 õÞYJrnr cìü?À
I in rtuiò. ü
lrh'brot4ont eprç,e .I¡1enÀs crq
den-s,{^ c>Ç c.,þ¡ec , cìo+ .*¿n:r
oÇ Çtu,8,
fr- btrrqon! $crCe c¿cs Àoc¡:'cr
fr¿lt{e- r *hcrn ú?
Trr¿e. $ììfifflsz hrrr: ¿lÕoolr-g lnnS
(**= tcpo þ/rnl
{otr-* qrÇ bq.:. 0" Ooz
Physics knowledge
ond conccpluol underslonding
you lrove olrcody
conslrucleC ¡n your heod
¡,<'t.lerJ rt)^,¿z! Þ.rrp r- rr't¡ ,l?
Chcck lhol yovr on3Íêr ¡t rêo!ànoblê ðnd potrlble
'f<,,cc
Photo by Seth Casteel
http://www.littlefriendsphoto.com
Permission to use agreed
Introduced in tutorials
!
Extensive scaffolding
exercises
!
Revisited in subsequent
tutorials
!
Tutorials delivered by 24 TAs
24. Engagement with PeerWise
PW1 PW2
Contributed and met minimum requirements
Contributed but did not meet mininum requirements
Did not participate
0.84 0.80
Total: 791
25.
26. Question/Explanation Quality
Bloom’s Taxonomy of levels in the cognitive domain
Score Level Description
1 Remember Factual knowledge, trivial plugging in of numbers
2 Understand Basic understanding of content
3 Apply Implement, calculate / determine. Typically one-stage problem
4 Analyze Typical multi-step problem; requires identification of strategy
Evaluate Compare &assess various option possibilities; often conceptual
Synthesize
Ideas and topics from disparate course sections combined. Significantly
challenging problem.
Text
28. Question/Explanation Quality
Description of explanation quality
Score Level Description
0 Missing
No explanation provided or explanation incoherent/
irrelevant
1 Inadequate Wrong reasoning and/or answer; trivial or flippant
2 Minimal
Correct answer but with insufficient explanation/
justification/ Some aspects may be unclear/incorrect/
confused.
3 Good Clear and detailed exposition of correct method & ans
4 Excellent
Thorough description of relevant physics and solution
strategy. Plausibility of all answers considered. Beyond
normal expectation for a correct solution
34. Logistics
!
!
Cohort split into 4 groups
!
Each week one group tasked with creating LOs
!
Each submission counts for 2.5% of final grade
!
Repeat cycle twice per Semester
!
Students can submit >2 LOs & receive grade for best 2
!
Short survey on submission
!
Students encourage to apply CC licenses
35. Results: engagement
0 100 200 300
LO 1
LO 2
LO 3
LO 4
LO 5
LO 6
LO 7
LO 8
Number of students
Assigned
Optional
37. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
100
200
300
Grade (%)
Numberofstudents LO Grade Distribution
These students
didn’t even try!
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
100
200
300
Grade (%)
Numberofstudents LO Grade Distribution
38. Which students aren’t submitting LOs?
Non-participants are from all walks of life!
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
5
10
15
20
25
Final Exam (%)
Numberofstudents
Final Exam marks of students
that did not participate in LOs
40. Results: time on task
0 100 200 300 400
Less than 0.5h
0.5 to 1 h
1 to 2h
2 to 3h
3 to 4h
4 to 5h
More than 5h
Number of students
41. Results: self reported change in
understanding
0 200 400 600 800
None
Little
Moderate
Good
Excellent
Number of students
0200400600800
Number of students