Skip to main content

Week 10 follow up to a flipped classroom pilot

We are coming up to the end of semester here (week 10 of 14), and so I caught up with the unit convener of the Investments unit (where we trialled the flipped classroom model: http://shanenuessler.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/conclusions-from-flipping-investment.html). I wanted to find out what, if anything, students have been saying since week 4 and 5. There is also the need to plan the development of the unit for 2014 where we will (determined in this meeting) flip every week in the semester.


In the weeks since the workshops (which proved to be highly successful) students have commented that:

  • The students who did not attend the workshops now say the they wish they had. The workshops were constructively aligned with the unit outcomes, content and assessment, to the point of allowing students to use their own project data rather than generic data (week 4). The assessment item associated with the workshops is due Monday Week 11 (next week), and the students who did not engage now wish they had. The students who did attend the workshops tell them that the workshop helped with the assignment and that they should have attended.
  • Students who tried to catch up on the topics are trying to use material found on youtube but find that these videos are generally inadequate for understanding the topics because they lack the full context of the concepts/topics that Lixian provides.
  • In reference to putting content (e.g. lecturers) online students said they would not necessarily refer to that material. Good alignment practice says we need to link that content to the outcomes, activities and assessment anyway, so students will have a reason to access it due to good curriculum design.
  • Students felt more able to approach Lixian and discuss learning issues etc in the weeks after the week 4/5 workshops. This may be a result of the mentor role Lixian assumed in the workshops early on in the semester.
In terms of other observations Lixian noted the following:
  • Mid term exam results show that, compared to the 2012 cohort, the mid-term exam failure rate moved from 38% (2012) to 18% (2013). The characteristics and make up of the two cohorts were similar, and the changes to the exam consisted of changes to questions but the topics, weighting, format, mode etc remained the same. 
  • 2012: 61 students
  • 2013: 101 students
  • (Clearly a comprehensive longitudinal study would need to be conducted to discover the relationship and extent to which the flipped workshops had an effect on the exam results and other aspects of student behaviour observed in this pilot. What is notable is that the difference in behaviour and performance between cohorts of similar characteristics given this one major change to the curriculum design.)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What does 2021 hold for student #learningexperience at my university

"Handwriting Text E-Learning Loading. Concept meaning Forecasting the future event"   by  focusonmore.com  is licensed under  CC BY 2.0 This year we have a unique opportunity to capitalise on what was 2020 and all the impacts it had on learning and teaching.  Staff ICT literacy levels and confidence increased because they had to use digital tools for teaching, there was no choice. This situation was complicated, academics of all levels of ICT literacy had to adapt. Some staff had zero experience with digital tools and were using online tools for the first time, while others are always pushing boundaries and looking for alternative tools available from central support areas. As with staff, some students have very low ICT literacy, while others blaze ahead of the curve, using the tools like pros and needing much instruction. They just work it out. Shifting this cohort of students and staff to fully online was a massive undertaking and a huge shock for everyone.  Going into 2020

Good assessment design is hard, here are some resources that might help

Designing good assessment is an art and a science IMHO. Here are some great resources, as much for my record as they are useful for others. http://static.pdesas.org/content/documents/M1-Slide_22_DOK_Hess_Cognitive_Rigor.pdf https://www.teachthought.com/critical-thinking/14-brilliant-blooms-taxonomy-posters-for-teachers/ (nice) http://static.pdesas.org/content/documents/M1-Slide_19_DOK_Wheel_Slide.pdf https://www.edutopia.org/blog/levels-of-understanding-learning-fits-all-charity-stephens (multiple pathways to cater for student diversity)

Make your #onlinelearning experience more personal with a #lightboard

In August 2019 the DVCA at UC wanted to invest in some light boards as he had seen the educational benefits at the previous university he worked for. I was tasked with putting in a comprehensive bid to an annual equipment fund and, if successful, follow the process through to implementation working with AV Services, and Library Services. As of March 2020 the Library houses UC's first ever Lighboard, and academic staff are putting it to good use. The Lightboard is a glass panel filled with light which stands between the teacher and the audience/camera. The teacher faces the camera (viewers) and writes on the glass using liquid chalk (for best results), the results glow on the glass, and a camera is used to record the session. The camera we use flips the image horizontally so the writing appears in the correct orientation without having to flip it in a post production process. The videos capture the face and hand movements/gestures of the teacher, as well as the hand written conten