Bentley, Steve, Allan, Robert, Belton, Daniel, Moffat, Fiona, Pufal, Deborah, Balac, Pauline, Hunter, Alison and Shaw, Nicola (2013) Flipping the Classroom with Just in Time Teaching and Peer Instruction: Case Studies from the Sciences and Business. In: ALT-C 2013, 10-12 September 2013, East Midlands Conference Centre, University of Nottingham. (Unpublished)Metadata only available from this repository.
Studies published over the last 50 years, such as those reviewed by Gibbs (1981), support a view that there are more effective means of student learning than the didactic lecture, yet lectures prevail as a cornerstone of most courses in Higher Education.
This session presents case studies from four disciplines, three scientific the other business, which applied the inverted or flipped classroom model in an attempt to improve undergraduate student learning and achievement. Didactic lectures based on knowledge transfer were replaced with technology supported ways to deliver content, and contact time was used in a more interactive way to promote a deeper understanding of the material.
Our approach has been to use a prescribed “reading list” in advance of the lecture, comprising tutor-produced screencasts and written notes with videos, journal papers, book chapters and other third-party produced materials to facilitate the knowledge transfer which normally takes place in the lecture. In the contact time the principles of Just in Time Teaching (Novak et al, 1999) were applied. Students were ‘tested’ on the material that they had explored in their private study time through a short, online, pre-lecture quiz which also asked for reflections on gaps in their understanding. The lecturer was then able to assess how well the students understand the material and address areas of weakness in the lecture. The lecture theatre became a much more discursive environment using the principles of Peer Instruction (Mazur, 1997) to stimulate small group discussion by using hand held voting pads for questions that apply knowledge to solving a problem or analysing a scenario.
We conclude that there are several successful uses of the technique and explain these principles drawing on Mazur’s guidelines for ConcepTest questions.
The presentation will consider the following questions:
• Do learners engage with the assigned reading list and reading quiz?
• Does this version of the flipped classroom model increase student achievement on assessment?
• Is there an effect on lecture attendance?
• Do learners prefer traditional or flipped delivery?
We will involve delegates in an interactive activity using hand held voting pads in which they will experience participating in a Peer Instruction session.
The session will allow time for discussion, including an opportunity for delegates to reflect on how these principles might be transferable to their own practice.
|Item Type:||Conference or Workshop Item (Lecture)|
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||pedagogy,flipped classroom, peer instruction, blended learning|
|Subjects:||L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB2300 Higher Education|
|Schools:||School of Applied Sciences
The Business School
Gibbs, G. Twenty terrible reasons for lecturing, SCED Occasional Paper No. 8, Birmingham. 1981 available online at http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/20reasons.html (accessed 07/03/13)
Mazur, E. (1997), “Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual” Prentice–Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
Novak, GN, Patterson, ET, Gavrin, A, and Christian, W (1999), Just-in-Time Teaching: Blending active Learning and Web Technology, Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
|Depositing User:||Steven Bentley|
|Date Deposited:||24 Sep 2013 10:53|
|Last Modified:||24 Sep 2013 10:57|
Downloads per month over past year
Repository Staff Only: item control page