Student Led Flipped Teaching

Back in May I presented at SUM Conference on my exploration of Flipped Teaching in my math classroom. At that time a question was posed to me about having the students create the videos rather than the teacher doing it. At the time, I said that it would be a good idea, but one that would be extremely hard to plan.

I read this post by Paul Lehmkuhl at http://mathandedtech.blogspot.ca/2012/06/where-does-student-motivation-come-from.html and viewed David Wees's presentation on "Computer Based Math" available here: http://davidwees.com/content/presentations. David Wees suggests that we have students use computers to create math and he shows a video that students have created to make a problem meaningful. We have also been studying constructivism and motivation this week in ETAD 802. This has brought me back to thinking about student led Flipped Teaching.


What would that look like? How would it be organized?


My thoughts on these questions are that the entire course would have to be structured with this method in mind. At the beginning of the semester, students would be assigned an outcome to study on their own and become the "experts" on. Students would have access to the textbook and any other resources and support materials. At this stage in the process, the teacher would be available to assist the students in becoming experts, but there would be no direct instruction.  


Once the students have become competent with the content, they would create the videos and other resources for that outcome. When the students have finished compiling the resources, then the entire class could proceed through the content. Two different approaches could be taken here: 

• all students work on the same unit together as a full class group
• students work through the various units on their own or in group

Now that I have thought about this some more, I feel that it could work. I am still left wondering if this would be a good method for teaching a course. Would students be motivated to construct the content? Would the student created content be up to par? Would the other students be more engaged by the content since it is created by their peers? 

Since this approach would require complete by-in from the teacher to commit the semester, it seems like a bit of a gamble. Has anyone tried something like this? Would there be a better but still similar approach that could be taken?

Thanks for reading!

Flipped Pessimism: What are the opponents saying?

Tonight I was able to sit down and have a Skype conversation with Michelle Naidu (@park_star on Twitter). You can also read her on her blog at http://meandthedoor.wordpress.com/. 


Michelle is a high school math teacher in Saskatoon and has described herself as a "Pessimist" regarding flipped teaching. I am intrigued by this statement, so I was excited to talk with her.




These are the questions I asked her:

1. You call yourself a pessimist regarding Flipped Teaching. Can you explain this statement?
2. Do you see any benefit to using a flipped approach?
3. How do you see technology being best used in math education? 
4. Do you use a wiki as a class textbook?

Unfortunately, I ran into major technical glitches in this recording! I had planned to get into Khan Academy with her, but did not have the time.


Thanks again to Michelle for her time.


Please, post your comments and thoughts below.

Flipped Class and Substitute Teachers: The Role of the Teacher

This post comes directly from my experiences in the past week.

My wife and I planned a vacation during the school year, which maybe wasn't the smartest plan, but it was supposed to be three days away from the classroom. Some unexpected things came up and I actually was away from my students for four and a half days of class. This can obviously lead to some learning issues, especially in secondary level math and science where substitute teachers are hard to come by.

I saw this time away as an exciting experiment with flipped teaching. Before I left, I decided that my best plan of action would be to use a flipped teaching method while I was away; therefore, I created videos for most of the examples to be covered in class. This way the substitute would not have to deliver instruction in class, rather they can show my videos in class or ask the students to view the videos at home. In the classroom, the substitute's main task would to encourage students to explore problems, work together and help as best as they can. My vision would be that the students would really band together to reach a high level of understanding.

Before I left, I thought this all sounded great! Unlike other times I have been away, this time there would be different. There would be no excuses. Unfortunately, the results weren't quite as envisioned. The results were probably a bit better than normal, but the level of student confidence did not approach the level I had hoped. Where did this plan break down?

This leads me into thinking about how important the teacher really is in a flipped or blended environment. With only the videos to watch, the students were able to view the videos, but failed to really make meaning of them. When I am in class

• I spend time preparing the students to view the videos
• We explore the content together before unleashing the videos on them. This seems to be a really important step in the flipped process
• When we return the next day, I always recap the ideas from the videos. Again, this seems to be an important step in the students making meaning of the videos. 
• The next step in the process is the students actively engaging in the content; this is the main goal of the flipped classroom - more time for students to engage in content. 

How effective is this engagement without a teacher to guide the process? Based on this past week, my answer is that it is not very effective. Are there ways I could have improved my planning to make it more effective? Is the teacher vital to the process? Most students work without much if any assistance from me when I am in class, so why are things so different when I am away?

After having taken a couple university-level online courses and now blended courses with an online or face-to-face classroom component, I can see how important the teacher is to the process. At the very least, some contact time with the teacher gives you confidence and helps you feel like you are on track. In my experience, I feel apprehensive with the content until I can hear communicate with the teacher and feel like I am on the right track. Is this the main missing link when using flipped teaching with a substitute? If so, what other ways can we build feedback into our flipped method so that students can feel that sense of confidence without the teacher's presence? Can the substitute's role be to provide that confidence, even if they are not confident with the material?

Flipped teaching seems like a great method to use when you are away from the classroom, but there seems to be vital pieces in the flipped process that are missing without the teacher's presence. If you have had good experiences with flipping a class with a substitute, please share them with me in the comments below. If you have any thoughts on the topic, leave them below.

Thanks for reading!

Where I'm at with Flipped Teaching

I first learned of Flipped Teaching in April 2011. When I first heard of it I was excited by the possibilities, but also grounded by the question, "What if the students don't watch the videos? Then what?" I kept the idea in my head as I finished the school year. At the end of the year, I discussed the concept with one of my classes and most students were apprehensive about the idea of flipping math classes. Due to this apprehension, I put off implementing it until I could learn more.

As I went through the next semester and taught more of the new math curriculum, I found that I was having more and more trouble finding time to explore and investigate the content with the students, complete examples for the students that need it and still provide time for the students to practice. The student practice was almost always pushed to the last few minutes of class or completely at home. This led to a lot of students never really engaging in the content on their own, which in my opinion, is when the actual learning takes place. Students need to struggle with the content in order to learn.

Due to this increasing struggle to find time, I decided that I couldn't wait any longer; I had to try to implement a flipped classroom. I began fipping some math lessons in the second semester of this school year. My method of flipping is as follows:

• we still explore and investigate the content in class
• the regular lecture style examples are presented in video format for students to watch at home
• the next day in class we do a quick recap of the content and then students are able to engage in practice in the classroom surrounded by peers and the teacher!

Now when students hit a roadblock in their work, they are able to talk to each other or me to get through it, rather than being alone at home and simply giving up. In terms of timing, we are not spending two days per lesson; instead, we work on practice for the first half of class and explore/investigate for the second half of each lesson. Then students go home and watch the videos and return the next day ready to do practice. Here is a link to one of my class wikis that I use to host the post the videos on: http://mathf20.wikispaces.com

Here's an example video:

Overall, I am very satisifed with my experience with flipped teaching so far. All students are now actually working on assignments in class and are able to get the assistance they need. This is a huge improvement over the past where many students wouldn't complete any questions and home, which meant they were never actually doing any thinking on their own. Of course, there have been questions, issues and concerns that have arisen from this flipped method too. Examples of these are:

• student and parent concerns over trying something new
• some students not watching the videos
• does this actually fit the inquiry based math curriculum?
• the extra time it takes me outside of class to make the videos
• student outcomes seem to be improved, but the students this semester are also older and any have already taken another 20-level math course
• how would I implement this in other subject areas?
• can the flip be implemented within class time?
• how do I best use flipped teaching to differentiate instruction?

That is where I am at today. I am using my basic flipped model for most of my classes and I am happy with the results. Some students have expressed how much they like the videos and other students have expressed their disdain for them.

Over the next few weeks in ETAD 802, I plan to research and explore current articles and research on flipped teaching and other forms of blended learning. I will be posting a new blog post every few days.

If you have used flipped teaching, have suggestions for good articles or have questions or concerns regarding flipped teaching, please leave me a comment below. I would love to hear from you and learn with you!

Reading Report 4 – “Usability Testing: What Have We Overlooked?”

Reading Report 4 – “Usability Testing: What Have We Overlooked?”

Citation:

Lindgaard, G., & Chattratichart, J. (2007). Usability Testing: What Have We Overlooked? CHI 2007, (pp. 1415-1424). Retrieved from http://www.itu.dk/~hulda/Usability/artikler/p1415-lindgaard.pdf

Article can be found here: http://www.itu.dk/~hulda/Usability/artikler/p1415-lindgaard.pdf

Key words:

Usability testing, Metrics, UEM (Usability Evaluation Method) , participant recruitment, number of users, number of tasks, recruitment of users

This article is about (main discussion):

The article explains research into usability testing to see if “The Magic Number 5” for users is accurate. The research is to find:

1. That there is a correlation between number of users and the proportion of problems found.
2. That there is a correlation between number of user tasks and the proportion of problems found.

In order to study these two ideas, the authors did not perform usability tests, rather they were allowed to use the raw data from a previous study from a previous study (CUE-4 from CHI 2003) into the number of users needed. They took data from nine of the usability teams. The nine teams all completed usability tests on the same hotel booking website, but the nine groups did not have the same user tasks or number of users. Lindgaard and Chattratichart analyzed the number of users, the number of user tasks and scenarios, and the number of problems that each group identified (p. 1417).

Upon completing their statistical analysis they found:

• The first hypothesis that there is a correlation between the number of users and the proportion of problems found was not supported.
• The second hypothesis that there is a correlation between the number of user tasks and the proportion of problems found was supported.

 The authors argue and state that:

• There has been too great of a focus in ID on the number of users when the focus should really be on the number of user tasks and also the quality of participants.
• The Magic Number of 5 does not hold. In this study, “the percentage of problems found by the nine teams ranged from 7% to 43% - nowhere near the predicted 85%. The argument [the 5 users will find 85% of the problems] is therefore not upheld by the present data” (p. 1422)
• Giving users a persona to imagine during the tasks is helpful because “[t]he persona might have helped their test users place themselves in the real users’ shoes and hence carry out the required tasks the way real users would do. As a result, Team S [the only team with a persona] performed better than expected” (p. 1423)
• Rather than the number of users, the focus should instead be on “careful participant recruitment […]. It [also] pays off to give many sets of user tasks to a small number of users in a usability test rather than giving many users the same limited set of user tasks in a usability test” (p. 1423).

The authors conclude that:

Less resources and research should be spent on studying the number of users to use for usability testing. Instead the focus of further research should be on “the role of user tasks on improving usability testing approaches as well as into the importance of recruitment of test users” (p. 1424).

References: 16, (1981-2004)

Relating this to our project:

• When creating our usability tests, we should focus on increasing the number of user tasks
• The quality of the user tasks and scenarios must also be a consideration
• It will be more fruitful to give a higher quality usability test to a small number of users
• Care and attention must be taken to ensure that we have a good variety of users. The users should have varying levels of computer savvy and from different age groups. We should not just focus on using one group of users because they may all find different errors or problems. For example, a more tech savvy user may uncover issues with the usability than a less skilled user. They may approach the slide collection in a much different way
• It may be beneficial to have the users take on a persona while completing the user tasks

Reading Report 3 – “Usability testing for web redesign: a UCLA case study”

Reading Report 3 – “Usability testing for web redesign: a UCLA case study”

Citation: Dominique Turnbow, Kris Kasianovitz, Lise Snyder, David Gilbert, David Yamamoto, (2005) "Usability testing for web redesign: a UCLA case study", OCLC Systems & Services, Vol. 21 Iss: 3, pp.226 - 234

Article can be found: http://www.emeraldinsight.com.cyber.usask.ca/journals.htm?issn=1065-075X&volume=21&issue=3&articleid=1515113&show=html&PHPSESSID=s773sll66f75fnin5j7k5hp386

Keywords: usability testing, library web design, card-sorting, surveys, think-aloud, structured analysis

Summary and Arguments made in the article:

This article describes the process and usability testing that was done to redesign the UCLA Library website. The original website had many issues that were identified by users and also employees of the libraries. Some of the issues included:

• Different graphics and layout on different departments’ websites
• Inconsistent nomenclature and heavy use of library jargon, rather than terms that the users would actually use

Usability Testing Methodology Employed

• Structured analysis – an inventory of all the different library pages were taken and entered into a spreadsheet. This allowed for easy comparison of the different pages.
• Surveys – there was an online survey created. Anyone who completed the survey was entered into a $250 draw. They had 300 responses, but found that since the survey was not well-designed, most of the information was not useful. The most useful information came from the open-response questions.
• Second survey – a second survey was done to investigate the terms that should be used on the library website. This survey was done on paper and distributed evenly at the different library locations in order to ensure that the responses didn’t all come from the same group of users.
• Card-sort protocol – this was done to decide how to organize the website categories before thinking about the actual design. From the structured analysis the team came up with 76 “essential links.” These links were put on cards and users were asked to organize the cards into meaningful groups and name the groups. UCLA used 40 participants in the card sort, although research suggests 15-20 or 30 is the ideal number. To recruit users, they offered gift bags. It took two weeks to find enough participants. Users were given one hour to sort the 76 cards. During the initial tests, they found that users used a wide variety of category titles; therefore, they needed to standardize the terms. To do that, they did a second card sort protocol.
• Think aloud protocol – from the previous stages enough info was gathered to build a prototype website. UCLA decided to use ten participants in the think-aloud, even though research suggests that five users is enough. They used more than one participant from each user group, for example undergraduate students and graduate students. Users were given a list of tasks to complete on the website. Two facilitators were used, “one read the questions and interacted with the participant while the other recorded the participant’s actions, including: the path taken to find the answer; anything said while navigating the site; and any observations of the participant’s behavior” (p. 232). After the task, users were asked, “their general impression of the site, suggestions for the designer, or any other comments about the website. Finally, there was a brief survey about the participant’s previous use and knowledge of the library and the library’s website” (p. 232). No major changes were made to the site based on the think-aloud.

Following the think-aloud usability testing, the full website was developed. A logo was designed and a standardized page template was created to be used on all pages. Once the site was created, the team solicited feedback through emails to faculty, comments through a link on the new page, and library staff feedback sessions (p. 234). For any revision made to the site, a think-aloud protocol will be used.

References: 3, (2000-2004)

Key Ideas and their relation to our project:

• Surveys need to be well-made in order for them to provide useful information. Based on this Case Study, the open-ended questions provide more valuable data than selected responses.
• It may take a while to find participants for testing; therefore, we need to keep this in mind when planning our timeline for prototypes
• Card-sorting could be used to help with categories or set names
• Use a variety of users for the think-aloud. Make sure not all users are of the same type
• Give users a list of specific tasks to complete while doing usability testing. For example, we could ask them to find a specific slide, find slides for a specific location, etc.

Reading Now

http://www.emeraldinsight.com.cyber.usask.ca/journals.htm?issn=1065-075X&volume=21&issue=3&articleid=1515113&show=html&PHPSESSID=s773sll66f75fnin5j7k5hp386


http://www.itu.dk/~hulda/Usability/artikler/p1415-lindgaard.pdf

http://www.cais.ntu.edu.sg/~chhoi/APT/mmfp11731-wu.pdf

http://edmac.usask.ca/rick/classes/etad874/refs/keppell.pdf

http://www.infodesign.com.au/ftp/redesigncasestudy.pdf