October 29, 2014, 12:55 pm
Last week I was honored to be part of the MOOC on An Introduction to Evidence-Based Undergraduate STEM Teaching that’s currently being offered by Vanderbilt University through Coursera. Derek Bruff (who did a 4+1 interview for us last year) is one of the lead instructors of the MOOC, and he asked me to contribute three videos about my use of screencasting and lecture as part of the flipped classroom.
Those videos went out on the MOOC last week, and now that the Courserians have had a week with them, I’m going to share them with you as well. I made three of these videos. The first one, below, has to do with my approach to lecture and the pedagogical framework for screencasting as part of a flipped-instruction model. The second and third, which I will post later, get into the nuts and bolts of how I actually construct screencasts. I get asked a lot about those nuts and bolts, so it was …
April 30, 2014, 12:49 pm
We’re currently looking at points of skepticism about flipped learning and the flipped classroom. In the last post, we discussed the issue of students objecting to the flipped classroom because it is nothing more than having students teach themselves the subject. My response to that was that flipped learning should never look like the instructor simply giving students reading to do and walking away; like any effective pedagogy, it should involve a partnership between student and instructor that focuses on crucial learning experiences in class, which under the flipped model is wide open for such experiences.
Here’s another point of skepticism brought up in an earlier discussion about flipped learning, and it’s related to the first one. As with last time, I am quoting directly from one of the comments on an even earlier post:
I work at a community college. Many students are there…
April 28, 2014, 12:00 pm
I had to take a bit of a hiatus for the last two weeks to finish up the semester and to give and grade exams. Now that this is over, I wanted to come back and address some of the comments in these two posts. Specifically, many of those comments are principled skepticisms of flipped learning and the flipped classroom, and rather than bury my responses in an already crowded comment thread, I thought they deserved to be brought up point by point for discussion.
Here’s the first one to bring up, and it’s a tough one. This (and many of the other topics I’ll be bringing up) come directly from Manda Caine’s comment on one of those earlier posts. She said:
When my colleagues and I have [taught with a flipped classroom], students do not perceive that a professor is teaching them at all, so we have comments such as, “We could just do this at home” or “Why am I paying all this…
April 1, 2014, 2:34 pm
We’ve seen a significant ramping up of interest in – and exposure to – the flipped/inverted classroom over the last few years, and it’s been nice to see an uptick in the amount of research being done into its effectiveness. But one thing that’s been lacking has been a consensus on what the flipped classroom actually is. If a professor assigns readings to do before class and then holds discussions in class, is that “the flipped classroom”? I’ve said in the past that it is not (necessarily), but that’s just me. Now, however, a group of educators and others interested in flipped learning are proposing a common definition of flipped learning, and it’s pretty interesting.
Their definition of flipped learning goes like this:
Flipped Learning is a pedagogical approach in which direct instruction moves from the group learning space to the individual learning space, and…