The following content is
provided under a Creative
Commons license.
Your support will help
MIT OpenCourseWare
continue to offer high quality
educational resources for free.
To make a donation or to
view additional materials
from hundreds of MIT courses,
visit MIT OpenCourseWare
at ocw.mit.edu.
JANET RANKIN: A
general comment is by
and large, I thought you
guys did a great job.
Your learning outcomes
were for the most part
specific, measurable,
and realistic.
The biggest problem I think
I had was with-- the biggest
problem that you
had on average was
the idea of the
learning outcomes
really have to be measurable.
So if you use a word
like appreciate,
it's not measurable.
So that's something to remember.
If you use words like discuss,
it's potentially measurable.
But you need to make sure that
you set up a venue for students
to discuss.
You can't just say you'll be
able to discuss that and assume
that they'll be
able to discuss it,
That If that's in
your learning outcome,
you have to set up some
venue for them to discuss
and you to know what
they're discussing.
And then the two biggest
things that come up,
or the two most problematic
words that come up--
and I compliment you all,
because you did a great job.
Nobody used understand.
So that was awesome.
But the other
thing, there's words
like explain and describe,
which are perfectly good words
to use in a learning outcome.
But you have to make
sure that when you say,
students will explain
the ideal gas law.
They'll be able to
explain the ideal gas law.
Well do you know that
they're really explaining it
in the true sense of that
word that they actually
internalized what it means, and
they're really explaining it?
Or are they just spitting it
back, spitting back, maybe,
what they read in a
book, a definition
that they read in the book?
So you have to make
sure that you've
set up a situation wherein
they really are explaining.
And they're not
just remembering.
So it's a great word to use.
But you have to
make sure that we're
using in the right context.
Same thing for describe.
You can imagine that
has the same issues.
Describe da, da da, da, da.
Well are you sure they're
doing the describing?
Or are they just remembering
somebody else's description
and writing it down?
One good way around
that is to tweak
the parameters a little bit.
To say, in a world where
there is no oxygen,
what do you expect this
organism to look like,
given that it has to run
really fast or something?
So come up with
alternate realities
that that actually force
students to transfer and then
re-explain.
That can be helpful.
That can be really,
really helpful.
I remember once in
a kinetics class,
we had been deriving
the critical nucleus
size for growth.
And it's all based on a
radius, a critical radius.
And then on the exam,
the guy said OK,
they don't grow as sphere's.
They grow as rectangular boxes.
So then all of a
sudden, we had to look
at the ratio of the length
to the height of the box
or something.
So that really wasn't
just we were just
remembering a solution
or remembering a method.
We had to actually think
about what it meant
and then reapply it.
So just think about how
you can get students
to really describe, explain,
derive even, because you
can memorize a derivation.
But if you really want them to
derive it, what does that mean?
How are you going to test that?
So those are generally
the biggest problems
people have with
learning outcomes.
But by and large, you
all did a great job.
If you came in late, I'll give
you your learning outcomes
at the end to class.
If you looked at the Wiki--
and this is a test to see who
looked at the Wiki--
I had suggested you bring a web
enabled device if you had one.
And that's because
I wanted to set up
something called Back
Channel The topic today
is on active learning.
And so this is just one method
that might help your students,
especially if you
have a big class.
So we don't really
need it in this class,
but I just wanted to
give you the opportunity
to play with it a little bit.
It was designed for
conferences actually.
But it works pretty well,
I think, in classes.
So if you login to
here, this is the URL.
If you go to our
Wiki page bookmarked,
there's a link on the
Wiki page, if you just
want to link to it that way.
And then at any
point in the class,
you can type a question in.
And if you're on
the page, you can
see other people's questions.
You can upvote and
downvote their questions.
And I will take a break
in the middle, when you're
doing some other things, and
read what people have posted
and then get back to you.
So it's an opportunity
for students to interact
who may be a little more
shy, who may not want to.
I don't think we need
that in this class.
I don't think that there's
any one of you that
isn't willing to share
your ideas, which is great.
But this may be something
that's of interest to you.
Before we jump into the
topic today, active learning,
there were a couple
of mud card questions
that I just wanted
to talk about.
One was sometimes students
may nod off during class.
And if it's a big
class, there's probably
not a lot you can do about it.
If you do enough
active learning,
though, that will keep them--
that will make them wake up.
Especially pair
activities or activities
where they have to talk to
one or two other people,
or two or three other
people, it's pretty hard
to be asleep during those.
And you'll see.
We're going to do something
called a lightning round later
on.
And it's virtually impossible
to be asleep during that.
So you want to make
sure that it's worth
the student's time to
actually be in class
and be awake for it.
And active learning can
play a huge role in that.
Sometimes people are tired.
They stayed up too late
for whatever reason.
And you can't control
everybody in your class.
But you want to make sure that
you're doing everything you
can do to keep them engaged.
And if it's just one
student every now and then,
you probably don't want
to take it personally.
It's probably not you.
If the whole class
is falling asleep,
then it's probably
a good opportunity
to rethink your strategies.
Somebody asked if there
were good times of day
to have a lecture.
And part of it is you.
Part of is your schedule.
Sometimes you're allowed.
You can pick that.
And sometimes you really don't
have much control over when
you choose to teach your class.
People do say that
students, undergrads,
people between the
ages of 18 and 21
are not particularly interested
in being up at 8:00 or 9:00
in the morning.
But again you may not have
any control over that.
Generally speaking, that's a
pretty low time for people.
So if you want to take that
into consideration, you might.
But it depends as much
on you as the students.
If you're going to be
really tired at 4:00
but they're just waking up,
then don't teach it at 4:00.
Maybe don't teach at 4:00.
And the last one was
guiding readings.
If you just put a
lot of readings up,
students might not know where
to focus their attention
until after the class.
So there are reading
questions, reading guides
that you can post.
Read such and such
and try and think
about how you might explain
this, that, or the other thing.
And then there's also
pre-class questions
you can ask that
they might derive,
that they may have to pull
from the readings to answer.
So the concept of just in
time teaching, the idea
that students do
a reading and then
they actually have to answer
questions on the reading
before they come to class
and submit their answers.
So there's a whole
procedure around that.
It can be very, very effective.
You can do it for a large class.
There's strategies
and techniques
to streamline the amount
of time you put into it.
But it does force them
to do the reading.
And it does guide, at some
level, what they read.
And that's a great
great approach.
And I'm happy to talk more about
that at another time or later
or offline.
I did go to the Teaching
with Technology conference,
the Teaching Professor
Technology Conference.
And they were giving out little
ribbons to stack on your badge.
And this was a prominent one.
It's in the syllabus,
which I thought
was just crazy timely because
a couple of weeks ago.
So if you want one of
these to stick somewhere.
And then they all said when I
tweet, which was sort of weird.
But anyway I brought those back.
Anybody want some.
Sometimes my computer
doesn't wake up.
So let's pretend that instead
of the class active learning
today, I decided I was going
to teach you how to juggle.
And I said, here's the
equation for how to juggle.
And here's the variables,
F, D, V N, and H,
which are ball in the
air, ball in an hand,
time hand is vacant, number
of balls, number of hands.
And this is this
handy dandy equation,
which if you balance it out, it
describes the juggling process.
And for those of you
that are visual learners,
I have a graph here, a
yellow ball, a blue ball,
and a pink ball.
And then you can see that just
shows the path of the balls.
If you remember from
physics, there's
the equations of motion in the
x direction in the y direction.
And so I think I probably did a
pretty good job of teaching you
how to juggle.
No, did a terrible job of
teaching you how to juggle.
I didn't even come close to
teaching you how to juggle.
And if I were to
give you a test,
let's say, and I were to
measure whether or not
you could juggle, I
guarantee that some of you
would be able to juggle.
And I could say, I did a great
job teaching how to juggle.
But I didn't.
If you knew how to
juggle coming in,
presumably you still
know how to juggle.
I did no harm, I think.
However if you didn't know
how to juggle coming in,
you don't know
how to juggle now.
So why is this here now?
Why did I bother to
do this stupid thought
experiment right now?
AUDIENCE: Because
this is clearly
how most classes are taught.
Obviously it would be
easier to have a ball
and show us how to juggle,
active learning as opposed
to just showing the theory
behind it and ending there.
JANET RANKIN: And I
think a lot of times
we really do, in science and
engineering classes, we really
put up a lot of equations.
And then it's not like
we expect somebody
to do something
physically with them.
But we expect them to be able
to manipulate the equations,
transfer the equations,
apply the equations.
And we never really
talked about that.
We talked about the equations.
So it's a real call
in my mind, for us
to think about what
it is we really
want students to be able to do.
And then make sure that
they're doing stuff
to teach them that helps
them learn how to do that.
And I know you all
read the readings
and that they talk a lot
about active learning.
There's a few things about
techniques for active learning.
There's a few things about
the why's of active learning.
There's some data for why
active learning works.
But I'm guessing that
there's a range of buy in
at this point from you guys.
Eh, I don't think it's worth it.
Or I don't really know.
So for the first 20
minutes, 25 minutes
of class, what
I'd like you to do
is I'd like you to
pretend that you
were part of a department,
the STEM department.
Call it whatever field you want.
And there is a proposal
that your department
should commit funds
to train professors
and develop resources,
the resources
necessary for the adoption and
ongoing use of active learning
techniques in all courses.
And the target date is 2017.
You've got a year to
get all courses up
to speed with active
learning stuff introduced
into these classes and with
a plan for how to do that.
So what I'm going to do is I'm
going to just count off one,
two, three, one, two, three.
And I'm going to ask
you to form a group.
If you're a one, go
with the one group.
Two go with the two group.
A three go with the three group.
And you're going to
have to physically move.
So just remember your number.
One.
AUDIENCE: Two.
AUDIENCE: Three.
AUDIENCE: One.
AUDIENCE: Two.
AUDIENCE: Three.
AUDIENCE: One.
AUDIENCE: Two.
AUDIENCE: Three.
AUDIENCE: One.
AUDIENCE: Two.
AUDIENCE: Three.
AUDIENCE: One.
JANET RANKIN: It doesn't matter
that they're not the same size.
Can we get all the ones, let's
say all the ones up here?
All the twos here.
And all the threes there.
And I'll tell you what
to do in just a sec.
So if you're group
number one, you
have to adopt the
position that you are pro.
You are going to push for the
adoption of this resolution.
And you have to come up
with a set of arguments
and a set of reasons
why it's a good thing.
I don't care what
you think personally.
I don't care if you think
active learning is the worst
idea ever.
For the purposes
of this debate, you
need to pretend you're
totally into it.
And you need to come up with
some good arguments why.
Two are against it.
Again, I don't care how
you feel personally.
But come up with some
good solid arguments
why you should not do this.
AUDIENCE: We are against it?
JANET RANKIN: Against,
you do you not want it.
No.
Group number three, you
got a little bit of time.
But get to know each other.
And you're going to
hear the arguments.
You're going to hear a case
presented by the pro people,
the con people.
And then you are going
to deliberate and decide
what's going to happen
in your department.
You guys are the deciders.
It's an American political joke.
But we'll let that go.
And you guys get this
lovely microphone.
So I'm going to give
you 10 minutes for this.
So be ready to share your views.
You've got about,
maybe, two or three
minutes of a spiel of proof.
And then we'll do one
exchange of debate.
And then the
deciders will decide.
[SIDE CONVERSATIONS]
JANET RANKIN: I'm going to ask
someone from each of the groups
to make a statement
that puts forth the side
that you're supposed to defend,
if that is the side you're
supposed to defend.
So we'll start with the pros.
So someone from your
group ready to talk pros?
All right, Michelle.
AUDIENCE: So we are
pro active learning.
And part of the
basis for thinking
that active learning's
important is
that we believe that
without active learning,
the professor usually
just resorts to lecturing.
And we think that lectures
are not effective.
Students don't learn
simply because the material
is presented to them.
Lecturing wastes
resources, because you
could be lecturing to 1,000.
But only 15 students
may be reached.
And if you use active
learning instead of lecturing,
it can make sure the students
are paying attention.
You can check that
they're understanding.
You can know what
they are getting
and what they're not getting.
We also feel that active
learning is a life skill.
And that if students learn
to learn by do things
and they learn by
talking to each other
and by going through a
process and solving problems,
that they can take this skill to
outside of the classroom later
in society.
Then that the society
that you have students
who are used to
being active learners
and who know how to
solve problems that way.
And we also think that the
end, the big point that we have
is that you remember
things that you use.
If you learn something,
if it goes in one ear
and out the other, if you
don't actually use it,
you're not going to remember it.
If you're not forced to
actually work through a problem
and really think about it
and use it in a classroom,
that you're much less
likely to actually hold on
to that information.
So these are all
reasons why we think
that we should promote active
learning in our department.
JANET RANKIN: OK,
thank you very much.
The con, or I guess I
should say the not whatever.
Anyway, group two.
AUDIENCE: Do you want to do it?
AUDIENCE: OK.
We start with a basic question.
The question is, why do we
want to change what is working?
We are training our students.
They are getting job.
The professor are doing well.
They are collecting grants.
The original [INAUDIBLE] is OK.
So why do you want to
change what is working?
So that is the first question.
Now the first thing is that,
if you want to go about this,
it's going to consume
a lot of money.
It's going to take
a lot of money.
And then it cuts
into your funds.
The one funds for other
such, want to buy equipment
for the laboratory, want
to go hire scientists,
want to go hire post doc.
So why do we want to change?
Where do we get these funds?
We divert funds for the
training of professors.
And they're going to be
little bit of no funds for all
this such work.
And secondly, the efforts
to train professors
is likely to be very huge.
Professors are used to
this method of teaching.
And as you saw, they
will not want to change.
There's going to be a lot
of time changing them.
And we're not even sure,
if we try to change them,
whether they're going to be able
to do it at the end of the day.
Thirdly, we are not sure that
the stakeholder would be happy.
What about the alumni
that are very much
used to the method of teaching?
What about the parents?
are they now going
to go against us?
Will they not see that
the professor no longer,
just come to the class, give
them group work like this
without teaching,
without writing?
Then the professor is
no longer teaching.
And they are just going
to collect their salary.
And then, there's
not to be constrained
on time to cover syllabus.
When I saw I spend
a lot of money
being in group work,
individual, or this and that.
So how do you complete
your syllabus?
You have about 20 topics
to cover this semester.
And by the time you
start active learning,
how are going you cover
about 50% of them?
Then you push all of
that up [INAUDIBLE].
So it's not going to work.
We should just drop the idea.
What have we value
very last class?
You have your class of 500.
How do you want active
learning to be effective?
How do you want to treat them?
It's good here, because we are
just about 15 or less than 20.
By the time you have
500 students in a class,
it's going to be very
difficult for you
to have active learning,
difficult for the professor
to control classes,
and of course,
difficult for you to really
get something concrete out
of the whole thing.
So my final guys and professors,
I think it's not necessary.
the.
System is working.
Let it continue
to work this way.
Thank you.
JANET RANKIN: So now
what I'm going to do
is I'm going to
let each group ask
one question or a set
of clustered questions
to the other group.
The other group can answer them.
And then the deciders can
ask a couple questions.
And then we'll let
them deliberate.
So group number one, like to ask
some questions to group number
two or make some comments?
Go ahead.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, I
listened to you speak.
And I want to ask you.
You are saying that
the system is changing.
It is changing because the
status quo isn't delivering.
So that is why we are
adopting active learning.
And this is proven from
a research perspective.
There is actually letting more
students learn more materials
faster and more effectively.
So what do you think about that?
AUDIENCE: I'll
answer it by saying
the different research shows us
that the student that is good
is good.
[INAUDIBLE]
So why can't we just concentrate
on getting those students?
And what your presentation
didn't say about funds,
was the whole idea is
to fund the proposal.
And if we divert funds
to this new program,
and that's a very big issue.
You have to concentrate
on the question that
is the diversion of
funds away from research.
So if we can get the new
students and they can learn
by [INAUDIBLE], and
it's working great--
go ahead.
AUDIENCE: So you
want to throw away
the baby with the bath water?
If you have 20
students in a class,
and you have five
active learners,
and then you want to
discover 15 that wouldn't.
This program is geared towards
each one of the students
in the class to participate.
And I think it's
more cost effective.
If you could get
all the 20 students
to learn and to
learn actively, I
think that would pay itself
off at the end of the--
AUDIENCE: No, the
problem there is that you
have to face the proposal.
This is 2017.
It's a lot of change
in a very short time.
The proposal itself
is already against--
AUDIENCE: Our department
could be three people big.
We don't know how much
the department is.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
AUDIENCE: But then
the issue there
is that you're going
to retrain professors.
Professors are really
stuck in their ways.
And you spend all this money.
And it's very short time.
There's lots of
people from the labs,
and money from the labs
in this very short time
to train them on
something we don't
know if they're
ready to buy into it.
AUDIENCE: So I think
your assumption is that--
you're like, we're deferring
funds from labs and resort.
But you never once said you're
diverting funds from anything
related to the students.
You're thinking of it from
the professor perspective.
But really professors are
here to teach their students.
And you're like, oh,
we're taking money away
from the research,
from the lab equipment,
from all these
different things that
sound great to the professor
but have literally nothing
to do with the students
learning experience
or the student's
experience on campus.
And from the
student's perspective,
that's really frustrating, when
that's all the professors care
about.
And that's what
makes a difference
between a good professor
and a crap professor
is one who cares.
And I think, if you want
a professor to care,
oftentimes they're willing
to make the effort that
is needed to change
their teaching style
or do whatever it is
that's necessary to have
their kid interested and
engaged in the same material
that this professor loves.
So you keep talking
about diverting funds.
But you never once mentioned
diverting these funds
away from this one
teaching initiative
to a different
teaching initiative.
So just keep that in mind .
AUDIENCE: So the
problem is that when
we are looking at the proposal
itself, the time, 2017, this
is already the end of 2015.
So that means you
are going to do this,
by 2017, that means you're
going to do it by 2016.
We're not against active
learning in the [INAUDIBLE].
[LAUGHTER]
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
AUDIENCE: --the proposal.
We are against-- we
need these two group
and against this proposal.
So for this proposal, we
are against this proposal,
because you know how
much it's about the funds
and the resources.
And that is why we are
against the proposal.
And also you pick
whatever [INAUDIBLE],
we're not even sure that
it is going to work.
JANET RANKIN: I'm going to
take, because you guys actually
did ask a question, so I'm
going to count that to you
Did you have another
separate one?
AJ, you look like you
might have some questions.
AUDIENCE: Yeah actually
I was just curious,
so if this initiative
is really great,
it looks like a lot
of this research
has been done since '80s.
Why isn't it adopted?
Why are we having this
conversation now in 2015?
AUDIENCE: I think
we should look back
at this issue of the lecturing
system that we are using now.
It's static.
When there was no
printing, lecturers then,
they get the material.
They reach the students.
So lecturing is a Latin
word that means reading.
Now since then, now
we are printing.
We have information
readily available
that people can get on at
their home and their own
and develop to something.
Too So there is a need for
us to change to a new system,
because the old system that
more facilitated lecturing has
changed.
So then we have to change.
JANET RANKIN: I'm
going to turn it over
to the deciders who
now have to discuss.
They've been resting
for many minutes.
So now they have to.
So you have questions
for each of the groups?
AUDIENCE: Yeah.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, thank you.
Great arguments on both sides.
I found it interesting, when
you talked about the larger
classes, so my first
question is for this group.
So how would active learning
apply to a large class?
The proposal is that
it's for all courses.
And so are there courses where
this doesn't lend itself to?
AUDIENCE: Even in the classes
with 700, 800 students here,
they still do active learning
for the freshmen, i.e.
Clicker questions.
Oftentimes professors have
to talk to your partners.
So they'll pose a question.
Everyone will click
on their answer.
And then they'll be
like, now go back
and talk to the person
sitting next to you.
And then you'll vote
again in two minutes.
So I think that's just one
example of how you can engage
a class of a lot of students.
AUDIENCE: And to add
to that, actually it's
also been found out that when
peers speak to themselves,
they even learn the
material better than when
the expert, who may have lost
touch to what it could be
like to learn from a
student's perspective.
So peers speak to themselves
and teach themselves even faster
than the expert who
is in front of them.
AUDIENCE: Yeah I have comment
for the against group.
You mentioned that you
don't require to create
or active learning, because
some students are very smart.
They get it right.
But don't you think
that education
is a right of every child?
And they deserve to
have a good shot at it.
So why do you want to pull
one child out of here,
because he's not smart enough?
AUDIENCE: I just
to answer, I think
we are pushing for
the best education.
We believe that is
the traditional way.
We think that active
learning can happen
outside of the classroom.
This is the way it's
worked for 300 plus years
over at Harvard, one of
the best universities, MIT
for 100 plus years.
We think that
essentially it's working.
And the reason we're having
this conversation right
now is because it has worked.
So we want to
continue that legacy.
We think that every system
is going to have problems.
And if you analyze any system,
you're going to find issues.
And there are certainly
some smaller inefficiencies
within the lecture.
But by and large, it's trusted.
And it works.
AUDIENCE: I want to
add on what adding.
So I think we are not pushing
those less smart kids away,
because they can actually
learn from each other outside
of class.
We just want to say
that doing the lecture
is more efficient if the
professor lecturing at them,
giving all the information.
As a footnote to that-- sorry--
if professors come to the
class and just give theory
and go away, and the
smart kids get it,
then how do you measure the
professor's performance?
How do you think
about, say, something
like students information
on educational quality?
How do you measure that?
AUDIENCE: You don't
really need the professor
to be extremely active and do
active teaching in the class.
The full student can
actually get what they need.
You have a bunch of homeworks.
You have a bunch of test
questions, exam questions,
that student, whether
they like it or not,
they will surely be forced
to read those things.
And by the time they come
back, they come back learning.
Lot of graduate from MIT,
they are l really doing well.
About 25% start up
their own business.
Probably like 70% get
jobs when they finish.
What are you talking about?
The system is working.
And That's what we're saying.
And their value is a great.
The evaluation is
done on the type
of textbook, the
mode of lecture,
the [INAUDIBLE] lecture.
So these are the things
that I try to evaluate
in the evaluation process.
And it has been great.
And we want it to continue.
AUDIENCE: So we addressed
the measuring impact.
And that goes for both.
But for the active
learning, how do we
quantify how much
active learning needs
to go into these different
classrooms in the department?
So how will we ensure
the appropriate amount
has been implemented in
different classrooms?
Basically, how much
active learning
needs to go into a
classroom to create change
or to strengthen our
student learning?
AUDIENCE: How much
has to go in or how
you're going to make sure that
the professors are doing it?
AUDIENCE: Both, I
guess, is the question.
If there's a professor that's
more on the lecture side
that might throw one thing pair
share in and call it a day.
So how do we ensure the
appropriate active learning
techniques and the quantity
are there for the classrooms?
AUDIENCE: I think we'd have
to go back to the research
and see how much, whether
it's 30% of the time needs
to be spent on active
learning activities,
or to see what has been proven,
because active learning has
been proven to be effective.
But we would have to
go back and make sure
that we set a standard that,
if it is 30% of the time
or 70% of the time.
And I think oversight
from the department
would be important, in that the
leadership in the department
will have to sit in on classes.
And as part of the
training of the professors,
there has to be training.
But then there has to be someone
to observe them in the class,
give feedback.
The training has to be ongoing.
It's not just a three
hour seminar on this
is with active learning is.
And this is what you should do.
I think it's going
to be a long term
investment in the
professor training
that someone's going to have
to check up and give them
feedback.
And then they can
adjust from there.
JANET RANKIN: I'm sure that
we could [INAUDIBLE] all day.
But I'm going to give the
deciders two and a half
minutes, three minutes,
to talk to each other
and come up with a decision.
All right, the
committee has met.
And now they're going
to determine your fate
in this department.
AUDIENCE: Does this mic work?
Is this on?
Do I need to use the mic.
You can hear?
Well thank you again
for your arguments.
Certainly the panel felt
that the pro arguments
in terms of the benefits of
active learning are great.
And we definitely support that.
However, given the time
frame, and this proposal
is very aggressive, it would
be extremely disruptive.
Also the amount of
funds that we think
that it would take
to implement this
would be very high without any
proven way to measure success.
So what we are willing
to do is commit funds
to a pilot program,
where we can then
measure what the success
will be and then make
it a decision next year
as to whether or not
we invest for the rest
of the departments.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
JANET RANKIN: So I hope you
found this exercise useful.
I just want to debrief
on the exercise itself,
why we bothered to do it.
It took probably 45
minutes of time to do it.
But I made a decision
that would be useful.
So what did we get
out of this exercise?
What was the point?
AUDIENCE: Whether you think
that's it's worth it or not,
it's really important time.
Also, it seems
this confrontation
is happening a lot in the
department, especially
[INAUDIBLE] as they go
through the program.
I assumed this test would
be debated quite a bit,
internally and externally.
JANET RANKIN: Other
reasons we engaged in this?
AUDIENCE: I think
it gives everybody
the opportunity to think deeply
about the subject matter.
And it also, even if you are
against or for something,
you have to have
a deeper knowledge
to be able to bring out the
good points, certain issues that
might actually make
see [INAUDIBLE].
JANET RANKIN: [INAUDIBLE],
you want to add to that?
AUDIENCE: The topic
is active learning.
And what we just demonstrated
is active learning in practice.
JANET RANKIN: Yes, exactly.
And the idea to
Gordon's point, the idea
that it can be very, very
useful for you to have students
take an arbitrary
position and argue it,
because they will
learn things, they
will think about things,
that they would not
have thought about otherwise.
And it's usually not a good
idea to say OK everybody that
thinks this, go over here.
Everybody that thinks
this, go over here,
because all that
does is reinforce
what people think already.
And maybe it's not
completely correct.
So this is often a
very good technique,
when there's two clear
viewpoints or two clear sides.
And you want students to
really engage with that.
And exactly, we could
have had a discussion.
Or I could have had
PowerPoint slides that
said, here are the good things.
Here are the pros with active
learning, bum, bum, bum, bum,
bum.
Here are the cons of active
learning, bum, bum, bum, bum,
bum.
And that would've taken--
just to come out of my
neutral position here--
that would have taken
probably four minutes.
Instead we took 35
or so, 40 minutes.
But I think you probably
engaged with some
of the ideas and
concepts a little bit
deeper, because you had to
come up with it yourself.
So yes, all those reasons.
And it does come up often.
People are discussing it.
And it's not so clear cut.
There's not a right answer.
And you're going to want to say,
OK, well we'll do it by 2019.
Or we'll do it.
But we won't do that.
There's going to be deals and
all those kinds of things.
And that's OK.
It's OK that there's
not a right answer.
But that was the point
of this exercise.
So that served as our
discussion for active learning.
But you guys did it.
I didn't do anything.
AUDIENCE: And that
buttresses the point
that active learning
is the way to go.
JANET RANKIN: Thank you.
Yes, this is very meta.
This is very meta here.
Yeah and I do have to
feel a little bit bad
when you're like, what?
Then we're going
to do all the work.
And the lecturer's just going
to sit back and not do anything.
I took it personally.
But no, no, it's OK.
One thing I wanted
to bring up is
if you haven't read the
Scott Freeman article,
it's in the reading
list for today.
It shows-- let me
just bump to it--
it shows essentially
these results.
He did a meta analysis of 225
studies on active learning
or on classes that that
used active learning.
And they showed a 12%
decrease in the failure rate
in classes that used
active learning.
And so I was telling the
pro group that what say
in the paper is that if it had
been a clinical drug trial,
and 12% of the people on the
drug were having a better
outcome than the people on the
placebo, they would have had--
or the people on the control--
they would have had
to stop the trial
and give everyone the drug.
So in the sense of why
we're still lecturing,
that's to me one of the
biggest compelling reasons
for why we should be doing
more active learning.
12% of the students are going
to pass the class, on average,
normalized.
And they actually considered
both experienced lecturers, who
were just lecturing,
people that were considered
to be good lecturers
that were just lecturing,
as well as graduate students
who were first time teachers
but were using active learning.
So they looked at
all sorts of-- they
mixed up all sorts of outcomes.
And active learning appears to,
the data's pretty conclusive.
And this isn't the only
study that shows it.
So there are definitely issues.
There are definitely
implementation issues.
They're definitely
sticking points.
But it's something that
I think we can't ignore.
AUDIENCE: I just want
to add that it's not
only that we have 12%
decrease in the failure rate.
We also have big shifts in
the letter grade students get.
For instance, more people
shift from grade C to grade B
or from B to A. And B
to see a test like that.
So that's really
significant also.
JANET RANKIN: So I just want
not have learning outcomes.
But I did want to have the
discussion before I even
introduced them.
So I think you'll
be able to explain
the impact of active learning
exercises in the classroom.
You've already
started to do that.
And then you'll be able
to identify and develop
active learning exercises
that you'll want to use.
And you'll be able to think
about how you might use them.
I think, pretty attainable
learning outcomes.
I'm going to show
the slide a lot
throughout the rest of the time.
But remember, it's
constructive alignment.
We've seen this diagram before.
But the beauty of some of these
active learning techniques
is that their
formative assessments
of students' understanding,
of students' learning.
And so they are
actually activities
that happen in the class.
But they're also measures,
informative, formative measures
of whether students
are learning or not.
So if somebody had come up with
a really terrible argument,
or it was clear that nobody
had read any of the papers
on the active learning
research, then I
would know that
from this debate.
I know what you've read
and what you haven't read,
and what you're
thinking about and what
you're not thinking about.
And I get a good sense for
whether or not it you know it
and how much and how
well you know it.
And so do you.
And we'll see that
a little bit more
in these other situations,
where if you get a clicker
question wrong or you get a
multiple choice question wrong
or that you can't participate
in the lightning round,
then you know that you've
got to step up to the plate.
Or you need to try
something different.
Or you're not really getting it.
So you get information.
The learner gets information.
And the teacher
gets information.
AUDIENCE: I just thought
that was really powerful
in the readings, as well.
They mentioned that,
that students who,
when they get in
the group sections,
if it's clear they really are
getting a lot of things wrong,
they know they need to step up.
And that's in a different way, I
think, than getting a bad grade
on a paper.
And you know the average
distribution or whatever.
Or the professor
says you're wrong.
But when you know that the
people sitting right next
to you are getting it and you're
not, that really, I think,
will push the student
forward to do something.
JANET RANKIN: It's
news you can use.
It's information.
And then you're not
being penalized.
You're not in trouble.
It's not affecting
your grade if you
act on it, if you take the
information and use it.
So that's why, I think
that's the beauty of it.
There are many, many
active learning techniques.
And if you looked at the
website from University
of South Florida
has just, I think,
it's close to 200 techniques
for what you might do.
I'm doing a bit of a--
I call it the foie gras method.
You know how they
make foie gras?
They force feed the goose.
So I'm going to give a lot.
And we're going to do a lot
of different active learning
things in this session.
It's a little bit comical.
I know it's kind of
funny how many we're
trying to cram into two hours.
But I'm going to try to do that.
So we'll do some of these.
And we can talk about any
one of them in particular.
But a nice one to get students
in the frame of your class
is to they come in.
And they have five minutes
before you do anything
to write down what they thought
was the most interesting part
of the reading or answer
a certain question related
to the reading or solve a
problem or whatever it is.
You give them a prompt.
You sit down.
You focus them.
And then they're off.
I do want to just focus on the
word active for just a second.
It may help you to think
about active and interactive
learning.
There's all sorts of
ways to chop it up.
And at some level,
it's semantics.
But at some level, it isn't.
So students can be
active if they're
sitting by themselves
thinking about something
and writing something
down or solving a problem.
That is active learning.
They don't have to be
talking to each other.
You can do active learning
in a class of 3,000 people.
Stop and think.
Answer this question.
That's active learning.
That's way more than
happens in a lot of classes.
Interactive learning generally
implies that students
are talking to each other.
That's the most general
categorizations you can get,
active, interactive.
So we're going to
do a bunch of stuff
with clickers or
plickers, these things.
But there's some other
techniques you can do.
You can put up a
graph or an image.
And you could say,
OK, somebody come up
and show me the green
boundary in this picture.
Show me a triple junction.
Show me where the building, the
crack in the building started.
Show me whatever.
And you pass the pointer.
And then you have
the student who
has the pointer come up
with another question
and pass it to somebody else.
So that's another nice technique
that takes the responsibility
off of the teacher.
And so you're not
picking on students.
We've been doing mud
cards, think, pair, share.
We're going to do
a lightning round.
I'll talk a little bit
more about jigsaw later.
And if time allows,
I'll show you
a demo I did on diffusion using
the students as the atoms.
Sometimes if you're trying
to ease in active learning,
slowly into your class-- you
don't want to do too much--
you want to think about
the short time things that
don't require huge disruptions.
If you want to go back
to your seats, you can.
Maybe I should let
you guys do that.
So you know what we'll do?
While they're
taking a break, I'm
going to demo the beach ball.
So this is nice.
This is the beach
ball technique.
So when you catch
the ball, I'd like
you to tell me if you've
had any experiences
with active learning in
classes that you've taken.
And you can't count this one.
AUDIENCE: I had active learning
in my electricity and magnetism
class.
And that was called TEAL.
And it's very polarized.
The people for and against
it, especially the students.
So they basically
tables of nine.
And then within that table,
you had groups of three.
And each of those would be
a problem solving group.
So you'd have four problems
to solve per two hour class
period.
And that would be going
up to the board look
and doing it by themselves.
And then the teacher at the
end would reveal the answers
and tell us how
to go through it.
And, for my group at
least, there was always--
or my table--
there was always
this one person who
would write every single time--
JANET RANKIN: 3,000 People.
Stop and think.
Answer this question.
That's active learning.
That's way more that
happens in a lot of classes.
Interactive learning generally
implies that students
are talking to each other.
And that's the most
general categorizations
you can get active, interactive.
So we're going to do a bunch
of stuff with clickers,
or plickers, these things.
But there's some other
techniques you can do.
You can put up a
graph or an image.
And you could say,
OK, somebody come up
and show me the green
boundary in this picture.
Show me a triple junction.
Show me where the building, the
crack in the building started.
Show me whatever.
And you pass the pointer.
And then you have
the student who
has the pointer come up
with another question
and pass it to somebody else.
So that's another nice technique
that takes the responsibility
off of the teacher.
And so you're not
picking on students.
We've been doing mud
cards, think, pair, share.
We're going to do
a lightning round.
I'll talk a little bit
more about jigsaw later on.
And if time allows,
I'll show you
a demo I did on diffusion using
the students as the atoms.
Sometimes if you're trying
to ease in active learning,
slowly into your class--
you don't want to do too much--
you want to think about
the short time things that
don't require huge disruptions.
If you want to go back
to your seats, you can.
Maybe I should let
you guys do that.
So you know what we'll do?
While they're
taking a break, I'm
going to demo the beach ball.
So this is nice.
This is the beach
ball technique.
So when you catch
the ball, I'd like
you to tell me if you've
had any experiences
with active learning in
classes that you've taken.
And you can't count this one.
AUDIENCE: I had active learning
in my electricity and magnetism
class.
And that was called TEAL.
It's very polarized, the people
for and against it, especially
the students.
So we basically
had tables of nine.
And then within that table,
we had groups of three.
And each of those would be
a problem solving group.
So you'd have four problems
to solve per two hour class
period.
And that would be
going up to the board
and doing it by themselves.
and then the teacher at the end
would reveal the
answer and telling us
how to go through it.
And for my group at least--
or my table-- there
was always this one who
would write every single time.
And I feel like that detracted
from active learning.
I think it worked
better for other people.
JANET RANKIN: It's
definitely polarized.
Students really are not--
I think we talked a
little bit about this
when we did some of
the learning theories--
but students really are
polarized about whether they
like it or not.
The data that there's been
some pretty good analysis
of learning, measuring
how much students learn,
and then how much they retain
and all that kind of stuff.
And when you go
through that, students
seem to learn more and retain
more in the active learning
format, even though they
really at least half of them
don't like it at all.
So it's an
interesting commentary
That's a good great story.
So why don't you
give the ball a toss?
There you go.
No, you have to
answer a question.
Have you ever experienced
active learning
in a classroom
besides this class?
And how did it work or not work?
AUDIENCE: I would
say yes to that.
It's definitely the traditional
method, sitting in front,
face to face lecture.
JANET RANKIN: Fair enough.
Give a toss, toss to anyone.
Are we going to get the
same answer from all of you?
If it's just--
AUDIENCE: Is it
the same question?
JANET RANKIN: Yeah,
same question.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, I have.
Because I recently
studied in Sweden.
And that's the way, most
of the time that way,
they teach in Sweden.
So for some classes, generally
in higher level classes,
according with d-level classes,
they use active learning.
JANET RANKIN: Great and
students buy into it?
They're OK with it?
They work at it?
AUDIENCE: Culturally,
they tend to veer
towards active learning.
JANET RANKIN: And that's
a very interesting point,
the idea that it can
be a cultural thing.
If everybody else is doing
it, or it's expected,
then that's what you do right.
So some of these changes,
there's an incubation period
before they actually take off
and they're widely accepted.
AUDIENCE: In fact
in Denmark, I think
that's the only way they each.
JANET RANKIN: It's
pretty active.
I have a colleague
who's in, or friend
who works at the
University of Copenhagen,
and all new faculty have to take
a yearlong course on teaching,
no matter what department,
physics, math, a year long,
the faculty.
And here you could never force
the faculty to do anything.
So it's pretty
interesting that they've
been doing it for so long.
AUDIENCE: I have a
question about that.
Is it the way that professors,
their role as actual teachers
is viewed?
[INAUDIBLE]
But seriously,
people [INAUDIBLE]
or something, I think definitely
trying to enforce a teaching
class would be a
lot more receptive
than if you tried to enforce
that here, where teaching
isn't necessarily the focus.
JANET RANKIN: But there, it's
a good research university.
But on the teaching
side, that's the norm.
That's the expectation.
AUDIENCE: But what
about requiring--
I know it's hard when
you have professors
that have been
doing what they're
doing for 25, 30, 40 years.
It's hard to get them
to adopt new techniques.
But I think that requiring
things-- the faculty
that you can require things
of are the new faculty, who
have no power yet.
JANET RANKIN: Yes and no.
If the tenured system, the
requirements for tenure
don't change, then asking
them to take on new-- oh,
you guys should try
active learning.
Revamp this course.
And then they don't get tenure.
So it really has to be
a whole systemic change,
where the department buys in.
The school buys in.
The university buys
in and says, OK, these
are the criteria for tenure.
And in that is you have
to use active learning.
Or you have to--
that's where it would
have to get change.
Otherwise you
can't expect people
that aren't tenured to do it.
You shouldn't.
Let's give the
ball one more toss.
AUDIENCE: So it's
been a long time
since I've been in a classroom.
I would say, in a
regular classroom,
I don't that I've
been in a class that
does active learning.
But I have taken courses
that are largely lab courses,
like a mouse embryology
course, where
you have 15 minutes of lecture.
And then you go into
the lab And you do it.
And the professor will
walk around and help you
with the technique.
You're actually
there with the mice.
And you're actually
doing something.
So does that count?
JANET RANKIN: Lab courses
can be their own genre.
But there has been
this movement to take
that's a little bit of what TEAL
does, at a more simple level.
And there's a little
bit of lecture.
And then students are supposed
to answer some questions
or do something.
And then they come
back together.
And Studio Labs at WPI
has that same format,
where the classrooms are
built with lab benches.
And students sit at lab
benches and see a lecture.
And then they do
some experiments.
They're mini experiments.
It's not whole mouse dissection.
But they do a mini experiment.
And then they report back.
And there's an
interchange like that.
So there are some
blending of the two.
Often what people do
in labs is different.
And usually a good
lab is fabulous.
A good lab is fabulous, which
is another argument for why
active learning is
good, because everybody
thinks back about, oh, that
lab course was so great.
I learned so much
and did so much.
And yet that's the lab course.
And then we have the lecture.
So it's an interesting comment.
So that was the beach ball.
And you see you
guys got to throw
the ball at other students.
So I didn't have
to pick on every--
I didn't have to call on
people or pick on people.
I had a little demo here
about why it's important,
just if you ask a question
or you ask students
if there are any questions
or what questions they have.
And that's generally
a better phrase.
What questions do you have?
It's more welcoming, opposed to
saying OK, who's stupid enough.
Who's not following me?
Say, OK, what are the questions?
It's a more welcoming phrase.
But the idea of waiting.
So here, if I click
on this little guy,
you should hear 30
seconds of music.
So imagine you ask a question,
30 seconds for people
to think about it and
formulate an answer.
This is what 30 seconds
feels like of dead time.
Well, there'll be music.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
That's not part of it.
So did that feel
like a long time?
I know we had a
little break there.
But that feels like a lot.
Especially when you're
standing up here,
it feels like a long time.
But 30 seconds, give
them 30 seconds.
The point is, if you want
to give students 30 seconds,
you're going to have to time it.
You totally have to time it,
because you will not estimate
30 seconds effectively.
You will totally
underestimate it.
And then another
technique that you
can piggyback on that is
saying, OK, take 30 seconds.
I'm not going to take any
answers for 30 seconds.
So you may have an
answer right away.
But I don't want to
hear it for 30 seconds,
because there's always
that guy in the front.
I had this guy in my
high school math class.
And he used to sit on his--
this little short guy--
and he used to sit on
his foot on the chair.
He's on his chair.
And he's sitting on his foot.
And he had his hand like this.
And he was in the front row.
And whenever the teacher asked
the question, he would go.
And he would come up off of it.
And so he was always the guy
that answer the questions.
But that left some of us
who took a little more time
not having the
opportunity, kind of
like having the one person write
all the time in the TEAL group.
So that's a good way
to go about that.
We talk a little bit about
using clicker questions
to solicit feedback.
And we've used the
plickers in this class.
We'll use them again.
You can get dedicated
clickers, these dedicated punch
in things.
They use them for TEAL, I think.
Students may have
to purchase them.
That may cost money.
The department may
have to purchase them.
That's another source of money.
AUDIENCE: They make
us buy everything.
JANET RANKIN: So when I
was at Brown, actually,
the department would buy them.
And they'd leave
them in the library.
And then you could check them
out with your student ID.
And then you got that.
So you got it for the semester.
But it was linked to your ID.
And if you didn't bring it
back, they'd charge you for it.
But that's another way to do
it, a fairer way to do it.
We'll look at something
called Socrative later on.
I'll use it later on.
But it's a text.
It's an online format.
So students need a
smartphone or a laptop.
But they don't need
a separate clicker.
There are issues with that,
because not everybody is
going to have a smartphone.
And are you biasing your class
against people that don't
happen to have the technology?
This is why I like
plickers, because you
don't need to buy anything.
I give you the card.
And I need to have
the smartphone.
But you don't.
And then you could
always use index cards
or do the whole,
put one finger up
if you think it's A and two
if it's B and three if it's
C. That gets a little
tough in a bigger class,
because it's hard to see.
It's hard to count.
I like the fact that
the clickers, plickers,
and the Socrative
or Poll Everywhere
give you a histogram.
So you get a really quick
idea about who's getting it
and who isn't getting it.
So we're going to do
a couple of these.
Remember-- this is from
the label of the free body
diagram-- that these
misconceptions always
linger in a lecture class.
We talked about this free
diagram the other day.
So let's just try this one here,
give you another little warm up
on the picker's.
So you have the card.
And I'm just going to ask
you to look at the question.
And when you're ready to
answer, just hold up your card.
And if you can keep your
finger away from the pattern,
that would be great, because
it makes it hard to read it.
And then however you want to--
AUDIENCE: Does this work
for larger classrooms?
JANET RANKIN: It does.
I have a colleague
who uses it at Brown.
And he just started
teaching this semester.
And he showed me his--
or a friend-- he
showed me his plickers.
And he printed them
out on 8 by 10,
like a sheet of
paper, cardstock.
And they're enormous.
They're like this big.
AUDIENCE: How do you
not get [INAUDIBLE]?
Well Well they have
to hold them up.
You have to.
And you can walk
around a little bit.
But I'll show you this.
So I have the histogram.
And I measured everybody.
So now I know what you
think about this question.
I know who's got it right.
I don't know who's got it right.
But I know that most of you
have chosen the correct answer.
But there were a
few of you picked up
one of the other answers.
And so now I know that it's a
non-trivial number of you that
picked an incorrect answer.
So now I know exactly
what I need to do.
It's given me incredibly
good information
that there is some
out there that
have a pretty strong
misunderstanding
of the literature.
And that's that
some of you picked
A. There's a lot of data to
support that active learning,
active technique supports
student learning.
I call your attention
to the Freeman paper
that's in the reading for
today, also to the [? Haik ?]
article, which was referenced.
So those are two of the
more compelling readings.
But if you go through, you'll
see quite a few studies
that unambiguously show that
active learning has an impact.
So the incorrect answer is that
it always involves group work.
That's not true.
It doesn't always involve work.
As we said, you could
just ask students
to sit and think and then do
something with their thoughts.
And that would be active.
So Rachel, you're smiling.
Is there a--
OK.
AUDIENCE: Sometimes my
face just does that.
JANET RANKIN: I didn't
know whether it was a smirk
or whatever.
And did I show you
what this looks like?
So you can see with the
histogram looks like.
I did?
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
You weren't here,
though, when I did.
The time I used it before.
I'll show you offline.
So the histogram is
really, really useful.
So it really can ferret
out some misunderstanding.
We don't have to go
through all these.
But this is another way to
check for misunderstanding.
I can ask this kind of question.
It's a concept question.
It's a conceptual question.
And then I can ask
you to pick an answer.
And then I can see where
your misconceptions
lie about this topic.
So it can be very, very-- it
should be very, very focused.
It's not just a
busywork question
it's a focused question
with focus distractors.
The distractors are
the incorrect answers.
AUDIENCE: Can we do this?
I want to see what the
spread of answers is.
JANET RANKIN: Sure.
Let's do it.
AUDIENCE: They asked
this question--
I laughed, because they
asked a very similar question
at Harvard graduation.
JANET RANKIN: Exactly.
What was it called,
a world of their own?
AUDIENCE: Yeah one of those.
JANET RANKIN: Two times, check.
I've got to clear my responses.
Let's go.
So I'm getting you folks in
the back without a problem.
I got one.
I'm missing one of you.
Wow.
So there's any number
of things I could ask.
We're going to do
another pair, share
around this kind of thing.
But maybe not for this one.
But this is amazing.
Basically it's A
got three votes.
B got three votes.
C got four votes.
And D got three votes.
So it's pretty amazing.
AUDIENCE: What is
the right answer?
JANET RANKIN: Biologists?
AUDIENCE: B.
JANET RANKIN: The answer
is B. And it's the most--
maybe not surprising--
but the idea
that it's taking in
things from the air.
They're taking in gases.
But there's chemical reactions
which manifest themselves
in a weight gain.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
It's not a biology
class, which is why--
so that's just super telling.
That would be incredible.
If this were a biology class
and that was the spread,
that would just be
really, really informative
for the instructor.
AUDIENCE: Really worrying.
JANET RANKIN: Well
yeah, that too.
But it's biology class.
So don't worry.
But you do want to think
very, very carefully
about the wrong
answers, because you
want the wrong
answers to tell you
something about what students
understand or don't understand.
Generally speaking in
the adoption of clickers,
plickers, whatever, takes
a three step process.
One is that people
generally start
with these simple
fact questions,
and then more challenging
conceptual questions, which
I would put the
one we just did at.
That students, they might--
arguing with each
other could be useful.
And then the third
is you've just
totally revamped the lecture.
And it's all centered
around these questions.
And depending on
how students answer,
that's how you navigate
through the lecture
or through the
course, class period.
I would never recommend that
anybody start with this one.
I think that we're all capable
of starting with two actually.
And I think starting with
three may be a waste of time,
unless you really just want
to check and see if people
did the reading or something.
It's a big class.
And you just want to see if
they've done the reading.
But in general, I would
say put your energy
into coming up with some
really good questions.
And maybe don't ask as many.
And then as I keep
saying, I hope
you can start to see how
that's really, really linked.
It's a measure of
whether they get it.
But it's also an activity
to help them get it.
So I've been minoring
the Back Channel.
Nobody's saying anything
except for Dave.
And I answered him.
And because I gave
you a break before,
I may scoot on, continue on.
So if you want take a second
and login, that's fine.
But I may not--
AUDIENCE: That's the
link for last year's.
AUDIENCE: I entered it, and I
put entered into last year's.
And I got really confused.
JANET RANKIN: Uh oh.
So the one for this
year is back here.
Hold on.
AUDIENCE: It's like
four something,
4125 instead of 3969.
JANET RANKIN: Oh OK, thank you.
So while you're
doing that, I'm going
to set up something which
is called lightning round.
And we're doing these two.
So I'm going to just,
sitting in your seat,
if you can think about this
question, just the question
on the left.
Based on research
at NASA, what was
the approximate net global
change in temperature
between 1880 and 1975?
It's not a plicker question.
It's just a question.
Try to think about what
you think the answer is.
AUDIENCE: What is
Celsius to Fahrenheit?
JANET RANKIN: To get from
Celsius to Fahrenheit?
So you have to--
well I always just
double it and add 30.
So it's 8/5 plus 32.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
8/56 plus 32 is
the real equation.
Is it 8/5 or 9/5?
AUDIENCE: 9.
JANET RANKIN: 9/5 That's
why I just double it.
Close enough.
So what I'm going to ask
is that-- let's see--
David, Gordon, and Julie.
And if you can move down,
down, just to the end.
And then if Adam, [INAUDIBLE],
Dave can come around?
Just keep going.
Keep going.
Keep going.
That's fine.
One, two, three, four-- no, no.
You have to stand up, guys.
No relaxing.
Yes, but that's not--
I can tell a story.
Please stand up and move over.
Move over.
And just keep coming around.
Everybody's up.
Everybody's doing this.
Michelle, so I
need six, Michelle
come on over here
next to [INAUDIBLE].
That's fine.
Now [INAUDIBLE],
you come around here
please, and go
opposite David, please.
And everybody else just file
in and go opposite someone.
Sarah, do you want
to participate?
So here's what happens.
I'm going to tell you to go.
And you have two minutes.
The person in this line
takes some amount of time
and says what their answer
is and why they chose it.
And the person in that line
can ask questions or whatever,
and then say what they thought
and say why they thought that.
So you're going to have a
really quick conversation
about your choices.
And after two minutes, I'm going
to tell you to please stop.
And then you have
to get a new person.
And I'll show you
how to do that.
Everybody understand
what we're doing?
You're having a two
minute exchange of ideas.
And it's going to be loud.
Believe me.
And it's the person
opposite you.
Are you ready?
Everyone ready?
On your mark, get set, go.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
Let me ask a question.
Did you encounter people that
had different choices than you?
AUDIENCE: Yes.
JANET RANKIN: Yes.
So that generally means
it's a pretty good question,
because you get to hear lots
of different perspectives.
Now if this were the central
part of the class, this topic,
you might let the pairings
go even longer, even more
pairings.
So did anybody change
their mind based on what
they heard a partner say?
OK, a couple of you.
Generally, what
happens then is you
would want to have
a de-brief, where
we talk about why you
picked the answer you picked
and what you picked.
And most of the
time, the choices
are a little been informative.
If you found, as the instructor,
that everybody picked
a negative number, well you're
in a very different place
than if people are arguing
over how much positive it is.
So you're going to
use that information
to find out about where
the misconceptions are.
What's the advantage
of this method?
Gordon.
AUDIENCE: It's very
interesting, I thought.
One I found out is that the
students talk to each other.
We never talk to each other.
And it's easier for
them as to [INAUDIBLE].
So at the beginning, they
are aware of conflicts.
But as we rotated,
there was a convergence.
It was very interesting.
JANET RANKIN: [INAUDIBLE]
have your hand up.
AUDIENCE: Yes, one time
I was laughing just
because it was very effective.
There was so much [INAUDIBLE].
And when we started,
one resisted
some passionated idea about
this is how it should be.
And by the time it
went to all the people,
people can get all the idea.
You try to look for
the superior idea.
Then you decide,
oh, this is better.
When we try to switch again,
you listen to a better argument.
So from which one decides
without [INAUDIBLE]
the first one?
JANET RANKIN: A
couple of points.
One is that it's impossible not
to-- when you pair people up,
it's pretty hard for
somebody not to participate.
So if you have somebody
that's resistant,
they might still be resistant.
But it's virtually impossible
for them not to participate.
And also it's a
little less scary.
One person, it's really noisy.
You know you only have to talk
to them for a minute or two.
So it's a little less scary.
Everybody's doing it.
The other thing is that
you definitely want
to have some sort of de-brief.
You can't just stop and
go, OK, let's go on.
You're going to have to find
out what people's answers are.
And you're going to have to
address it or at least reveal
the right answer, because
there's many places
many, many places
for misconception.
And also, then, if
you do it enough,
you can maybe--
students can find
arguments or people's
explanations that
resonate with them.
And then you get exposed to
different kinds of arguments
or different kinds of ways
of explaining the problem.
So in this case, the answer is
actually positive 0.4 degrees.
So B is the correct
answer, just so you know.
AUDIENCE: Yes, I
just want to make
a comment that sometimes this
method could be confusing
as well.
For instance, if you listen
to two superior arguments,
one against.
For instance, I talked to
someone who was actually
in support of negative.
And she brought an argument
and so forth like that.
And somebody
thought of positive.
And there was a strong
argument also for that.
Sometimes if you just
be sitting on the fence,
I don't know where to get off.
JANET RANKIN: Well I think it's
OK to be confused for a while.
That's fine.
As I said, if this were a
course on global warming,
climate change, whatever it
is, we would have to make sure
that we heard all of
those explanations
or a sampling of those
explanations and said,
oh, well that's a good.
I can see why you think that.
But you've forgotten about this.
Or I can see why, so
that you can process it
all so that people
don't leave confused.
But it's good to hear
the wrong answer,
to be convinced of the
wrong answer, maybe,
but then to see why it's wrong.
That's an important
learning activity.
AUDIENCE: But this
method is only
applicable for where you have
cases where you can debate.
Because if you have very clear
cases, for example, if I ask,
what is the color of the sky?
It's a definite.
But when it's fuzzy,
then this can be--
JANET RANKIN: Yes, or
when it's a concept
you think people might
have difficulty with.
Yeah, it's not going to work
if it's a real clear cut.
I want to demo one more method.
This is think, pair, share.
And I know we've been
doing those forever.
But I'm going to couple it
with a clicker question.
And I think we can do
it in seven minutes.
So
I have two blocks here, because
this is just too fun, really.
I have two blocks.
They're the same
width and the same.
Length but they are
different thickness.
And I have this thing.
And I'm going to tap
on the thin block.
Makes more or less--
it's not really a note.
But it's some sound.
And I'm going to
ask you, when I do
the same thing, the same
force, the same place
on the thick block, will
the note be higher, lower,
or the same as the thin block?
And this should be A, B, and
C, not one two and three.
So but if it's A,
B, and C go ahead
and vote with your plickers.
Do you know that's what
they auto correct to?
That's what it, if you're
typing and you write plickers,
it autocorrects
to pluckers, which
can be pretty embarrassing.
AUDIENCE: So high
is for A. You've not
clicked on the thicker one.
JANET RANKIN: I know.
That's why you have to tell
me what you think it is.
AUDIENCE: Is this a A, B, and C?
JANET RANKIN: A B
and C. So there's
no D. There's a reason for this.
If I told you the
answer, then there
wouldn't be much fun in voting.
And I have everybody.
So I have a distribution.
I'm not going to tell
you the distribution.
I'm not going to share that
with you I'd like you to take--
just cluster.
It could be groups of three or
four, whenever you have nearby,
and talk about why you
picked the answer you picked.
And then I'm going to give you
the opportunity to vote again.
So in the interest of time,
two minutes to discuss this.
[SIDE CONVERSATIONS]
I wanted to just call attention
to a couple things I did.
I walked around and tried to
eavesdrop on your conversations
so that I could tell what
you were thinking about,
but without putting
you on the spot,
without asking you to say,
in front of everybody,
what you thought.
So that's one thing to do.
Now I have a sense for
your mental models,
how you're thinking
about the problem.
So I have some really
good information
about why you think
the answers you think.
What I'm going to do is I'm
going to give you the chance
to re-vote.
If you want to change
your vote, you may.
Or you don't have to.
Some of the clicker
software actually
lets you save
consecutive histograms,
which can be useful.
You can compare
if there's change.
This doesn't let you do it.
So I just have to--
AUDIENCE: Voting twice there?
AUDIENCE: I'm voting
for [INAUDIBLE].
He's not present, so--
JANET RANKIN: Voting in
Chicago, early and often.
We have exactly the
same distribution,
which flies in the face
of some other data I
was going to show you.
But that's OK.
I'll just in the interest of--
so one thing I could do
is I could call on you.
And I could say, OK, if you
said it was lower, tell me
why you thought it was lower.
And I could get some
arguments for why you thought
it was lower on the board.
So some people think of cellos
make lower sounds than violins.
And some people think that doors
on mansions have a low sound.
And other people talked about
xylophones and the length
and the wavelength
of the xylophone,
and the longer wavelengths
for the longer pieces.
So I know a lot about how you're
thinking about this problem.
The other thing I
know is that I am not
telling you the answer yet.
So there's a little bit
of suspense in here.
There's a little bit to
try to keep you interested
and wanting to know, wanting
to understand the answer.
AUDIENCE: Janet?
JANET RANKIN: Yes?
AUDIENCE: So you said we
had the same distribution.
But can we have a show of
hands for how many people
changed their answer?
JANET RANKIN: That's
a great question.
Yes.
Raise your hand if you
changed your answer.
It could've been amazing.
AUDIENCE: So sometimes we've
done that in my physics class.
When they ask, who
changed their answer?
And everyone raises their hand.
It's the same
exact distribution.
Or everyone goes from
A and B to C and D.
And even C and D originally
only had three people,
you'll see the entire shift.
And it turns out
A and B was right.
When we vote the second time,
we all picked another answer.
JANET RANKIN: That's very funny.
That could have happened.
Sometimes a nice
follow up question
is how confident are
you in your answer.
So then that's a really
good-- because you
may have 80% of the
people h the right answer
but if you say how confident
and hardly anybody is
very confident then, you do
need to talk about it some more.
So it gives you some really,
really good information.
So here we go.
Here's this one.
It's higher.
Exact same material.
AUDIENCE: So when you play
the marimba and the xylophone,
you have bigger bars.
That they get really thin
when they're on the bass.
The bass notes are really thin.
And the really small high notes,
they're really, really thick.
JANET RANKIN: So
that's one thing.
The other thing is
that on a xylophone,
it's a standing wave, because
you fixed the endpoints.
And the wave just vibrates
based on the length
of the pins, the separation
of the pins or the mounts.
So in this case, it's
a free vibration.
So that's another
different misconception.
And then if you think-- so the
easiest way to think about it
is a diving board.
If you had a thin diving board,
and you went and jumped on it,
it would go way down
and come back up again.
That's a long wavelength.
And that's a low note.
And then if you think about
a stiffer diving board
that you'd be kind of like, mmm.
That's a shorter wavelength.
So it's different.
You have different-- and
then any kind of a cavity,
like a cello or a door of a
house, if it's a big cavity,
it's a bigger standing wave.
It's still a standing wave.
So those are very different.
They are different models.
So this technique
is really great,
because it really gives you
incredible insight into what
students' misconceptions are.
And then you can really
make sure to address
those misconceptions to deal
with their faulty models.
So for the post-class
assignment,
I've asked you to
think about what active
learning techniques you might
adopt in your own teaching,
in your own classes.
And then think about how
you would adapt them,
anticipate any
issues or whatever.
So hopefully you've
gotten a good smattering.
And I'll post the
slides, which have
some links and things in there
if you want to look at videos.
And also check out that
list from University
of South Florida.
That has some amazing techniques
that you might find useful.
I'm going to send everybody off.
But if you'd like to
comment on the mud cards--
I know we're over time--
I have them here, if you
want to make a comment.
But otherwise, I will
see you next time.
And I'd like the plickers back.
