(Because nothing brings in readers like a physics pedagogy post...)
Out in Minnesota, Arjendu is expressing high-level confusion about the business of lecturing:
As I've said a few times before in this blog, I prefer to let students read the text to get a preliminary take on physics content on their own, generate questions and confusions on which I focus during 'lecture', and then check their comprehension of these principles by working together on applying them via problem-solving -- and doing this in my presence so I can help them work out what they do and don't know.
I see this as directing the class's and my energy at the biggest road-blocks to mastery. The traditional method of (i) presenting a lecture in class, (ii) asking students to respond to the lecture presentation with questions, and then (iii) go home to work on problems, seems to me to be quite inefficient.
I tend to come down more on the side of traditional lectures, myself-- I teach the intro classes off PowerPoint (using the tablet PC to scribble in additional notes), but I'm definitely aware of the issues he raises (which are also the basis of the Just-In-Time Teaching method). The stuff that I think students will find confusing is not necessarily the stuff that really ends up confusing them, and from year to year, they manage to be baffled by things that I think ought to be easy.
I end up doing primarily lecture for a few reasons, none of them particularly grounded in deep principle:
For one thing, it's generally faster, particularly in the intro classes. We're on a trimester schedule, and local politics demands that we try to cram something close to a semester's worth of material into a ten-week term, and lecturing is just a faster way of going through that stuff. I've had good success with taking the occasional class off to just throw out a bunch of problems, and circulate while students work on them in groups, but it eats up time, which is at a premium.
"Just have them read the book," you might say. Yeah, that's a possibility, but the problem there is that I've never really run across a textbook that I'm happy with. They all have little quirks, some area where the explanation seems to me to be unnecessarily opaque. I think lecturing about those areas at least can be somewhat helpful, in that I can provide a different slant on the same material. And, of course, those who find my explanation needlessly opaque can always turn to the book for a different treatment...
Of course, there's something to be said for learning how to learn from books-- the tutorial classes at Williams are certainly useful for that sort of thing. But then, there's the issue of time, again.
Finally, there's an issue of temperment. The "unstable" or "Just in Time" sort of approach is less suited to my personality. It's not the flying-without-a-net thing-- that aspect actually sounds kind of fun-- but rather the fact that the sort of interactive class Arjendu desribes necessarily involves a lot of participation from students, and I'm terrible at dealing with students who won't participate. The best tactic is pretty much to just wait them out-- ask a question that demands a response, and then just stand there until they get uncomfortable enough that answering is better than just sitting there.
As anybody who has met me socially can attest, though, I'm horrible with awkward silences. I'm good for maybe five seconds, tops, before I start babbling just to fill the gap. I'm a little better in the classroom, but most students can outwait me.
So, while I'd like to use a little more unstable pedagody, I just haven't been able to do it that much, or that consistently. It's something I'll probably keep struggling with, but that's one of the things that makes the academic life interesting...
- Log in to post comments
As to your "students who won't participate. The best tactic is pretty much to just wait them out-- ask a question that demands a response, and then just stand there until they get uncomfortable enough that answering is better than just sitting there." -- the pedagogy of Rudolf Dreikurs and his disciples gives some suggestions.
Behavior characteristics consist of the student wishing not to be seen, acting passive and lethargic, rejecting social control, refusing to comply, or trying most educational demands. The teacher will feel inadequate or incapable in relation to the student's actions.
Students may sit silently and engage in no interaction, passively refuse to participate, or request to be left alone in this instance.
Wolfgang (2001) states, "The student who shows inadequacy or helplessness is the most discouraged. She has lost all initiative of ever trying to belong to the group. The teacher must exercise great patience and attempt to show the child that she is capable" (p. 122).
To assist a helpless student look to these techniques:
* Modify Instructional Methods
* Use Concrete Learning Materials and Computer-Assisted Instruction
* Teach One Step at a Time
* Provide Tutoring
* Teach Positive Self-Talk
* Make Mistakes Okay
* Build Confidence
* Focus on Past Success
* Make Learning Tangible
* Recognize Achievement
Encouragement (Dreikurs, 1972, pp. 49-59)
i) The essence of encouragement is to increase the child's confidence in himself and to convey to him that he is good enough as he is not just as he might be. It is directed toward increasing the child's belief in himself.
ii) Some points to encourage every student. Avoid discouragement. Work for improvement, not perfection. Comment effort than results. Separate the deed from the doer. Build on strength, not on weaknesses. Show your faith in the child. Mistakes should not be viewed as failures. Integrate the child into the group. Praise is not the same as encouragement. Help the child develop the courage to be imperfect.
iii) Differences between praise and encouragement
Praise can be discouraging. Praise recognizes the actor, encouragement acknowledges the act.
"Dinkmeyer and Dreikurs were not saying that praise should be totally avoided, but what they were suggesting is that too much praise makes a child dependent on the teacher" (Wolfgang. 2001, p. 127).
References:
Dreikurs, R. and Cassel, P (1972). Discipline without Tears, 2nd edition, pp. 1-84, A Plum Book
Wolfgang, Charles H. Solving Discipline and Classroom Management Problems: Methods and Models for Today's Teachers. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2001.
As to your "students who won't participate. The best tactic is pretty much to just wait them out-- ask a question that demands a response, and then just stand there until they get uncomfortable enough that answering is better than just sitting there." -- the pedagogy of Rudolf Dreikurs and his disciples gives some suggestions.
Behavior characteristics consist of the student wishing not to be seen, acting passive and lethargic, rejecting social control, refusing to comply, or trying most educational demands. The teacher will feel inadequate or incapable in relation to the student's actions.
Students may sit silently and engage in no interaction, passively refuse to participate, or request to be left alone in this instance.
Wolfgang (2001) states, "The student who shows inadequacy or helplessness is the most discouraged. She has lost all initiative of ever trying to belong to the group. The teacher must exercise great patience and attempt to show the child that she is capable" (p. 122).
To assist a helpless student look to these techniques:
* Modify Instructional Methods
* Use Concrete Learning Materials and Computer-Assisted Instruction
* Teach One Step at a Time
* Provide Tutoring
* Teach Positive Self-Talk
* Make Mistakes Okay
* Build Confidence
* Focus on Past Success
* Make Learning Tangible
* Recognize Achievement
Encouragement (Dreikurs, 1972, pp. 49-59)
i) The essence of encouragement is to increase the child's confidence in himself and to convey to him that he is good enough as he is not just as he might be. It is directed toward increasing the child's belief in himself.
ii) Some points to encourage every student. Avoid discouragement. Work for improvement, not perfection. Comment effort than results. Separate the deed from the doer. Build on strength, not on weaknesses. Show your faith in the child. Mistakes should not be viewed as failures. Integrate the child into the group. Praise is not the same as encouragement. Help the child develop the courage to be imperfect.
iii) Differences between praise and encouragement
Praise can be discouraging. Praise recognizes the actor, encouragement acknowledges the act.
"Dinkmeyer and Dreikurs were not saying that praise should be totally avoided, but what they were suggesting is that too much praise makes a child dependent on the teacher" (Wolfgang. 2001, p. 127).
References:
Dreikurs, R. and Cassel, P (1972). Discipline without Tears, 2nd edition, pp. 1-84, A Plum Book
Wolfgang, Charles H. Solving Discipline and Classroom Management Problems: Methods and Models for Today's Teachers. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2001.
I had a couple responses to this:
1 - For new college students, it's very hard to figure out the "important stuff", and it's useful to have a professor to guide you through and point out the highlights.
2 - Many students may not learn well from books. Not having a lecture would be serious impediment to their learning. (It's not that they're lazy, but it's just difficult to assimilate information that way...and can be more frustrating than productive.)
3 - Students are often taking so many classes that it's hard to find time to read the text.
4 - The style described by Arjendu is very good for grad-level classes where the students are more motivated and interested in the topic.
As to the poster above, I think new(er) students to college sit passively without much participation because that is pretty much the norm in (most) high school(s). It's quite an adjustment to go from a place where you're expected to be passive to full-on classroom participation (especially if the class happens to be large). I think they're going to learn more if they're in their comfort zone, and pushing them too hard is going to take their mind of the material they're supposed to be learning because they'll be focusing on their discomfort. The place to do that is in the smaller, upper-level classes where they can build a repoire with their fellow students and the professor. But that's just my opinion.
I can certainly understand your feelings about 'awkward' silences, but it's something that can (and should) be overcome. Think about professional public speakers, or better yet stand-up comedians. Silence is one of the most important tools in their toolbox- when we say 'timing is everything', part of that is the empty audio space- the pregnant pauses- that allow jokes to achieve their full impact.
It's a skill worth developing.
I think Cherish's comment about 'conversation can wait until upper-level couses' is a very common view; it is rare (and difficult) to have discussions in large lecture-type formats. But one of the most talented professors who I've seen (who was a physics prof, for the record!) could foster discussion in a class of about 60. Not everyone contributed equally, but almost everyone came out of their shell enough you could tell the atmosphere was right.
If you can possibly afford the time- try to do it once in a while.
I usually end up doing traditional lectures as well, but despite myself, I really don't think of them as a good way of learning at all. Primary reason is that my teaching effectiveness is judged mainly by student evaluation, and I find that students tend to be very conservative, the younger they are the more conservative. So, whenever you try deviating even a little bit from the standard model of teaching (having them fill in some details, prepare for class, not following closely a single textbook, nothing really radical...), there is a predictable decline in teaching evaluations. The only time I manage to experiment a bit is in advanced graduate classes.
I thought Just-In-Time Teaching was going to be a Vernor Vinge/Rainbows End reference.
In response to Cherish#3: it is a change in style for most (not all!) students. But in my opinion, that makes it all the more imperative to make the change as early as possible, and NOT to wait until the small upper-level classes. I've have been reasonably successful at turning 200+ student lectures into an interactive engagement environment - it took me about three years to figure out how to do it, but I think it's working. What I recommend is:
1. Start on Day one. You can bring students along much more easily if you establish the tenor and mode of the classroom on the very first day. If they know from day one that you will *not* cover every fine point which they are expected to
know in lecture (an inevitable consequence of moving to interactive engagement - because the better the engagement is, the more (and better!) questions you will get, and the less time you will have to check off every little point)- they will accept it much more readily than if you change expectations during the class.
2. Tell the students what you are doing, and WHY. I've found that students really appreciate a few minutes of discussion about why the course is being taught a certain way. In fact, quite a few are just blown away (in a positive way) because they've never had a teacher take the time to explain why he takes the approach that he does. It really impresses them.
Robert P: Do you use a clicker?
Thanks to comment #7 from Robert P, I don't have to repeat those excellent points. I'll only add that reading someone else's version of point 2 helped focus in my mind why my "meta lectures" (explaining why I am doing something) seem to help.
And I'll add that point 1 is essential. The class must start on Day 1. If there will be homework, assign some. I don't read the friggin syllabus to them, I assign it as first day homework. (Works great, by they way.) We do physics on Day 1. Reading? In upper level classes you can (should) assign reading *for* Day 1 via e-mail.
If you are going to assume they are reading the book, you must act on that and never back down. No questions? OK, lets see you put it to work. (Ask question, pose problem, whatever.) But you had better make sure it is an excellent book and have read it yourself, cover to cover, before assigning it. I have yet to find that book for engineering-level physics.
But I do expect them to read the book. What I like to do is give a short intro to the Big Idea of what comes next, so they have some idea of what to look for. That deals with point 1 of comment #3. On point 2 of comment #3 (they may not learn well from books), my observation is that they need to learn that skill and the time to start is now. Every practicing physicist or engineer or mathematician or computer programmer has to be able to learn from books that are often very badly written.
PS - I find it more effective to plop the book under a document camera than to show the same thing in a slick ppt display. That helps make the point that ... it is in the book! (They won't know the ppt came from the book if they have not opened it.)
Robert P.: 2. Tell the students what you are doing, and WHY. I've found that students really appreciate a few minutes of discussion about why the course is being taught a certain way. In fact, quite a few are just blown away (in a positive way) because they've never had a teacher take the time to explain why he takes the approach that he does. It really impresses them.
Absolutely.
I always do this, and have found that I can assign things that involve a good deal more work than other classes, or even other sections of the same class, provided I explain the reason for what I'm doing. It even works to get people to do diagnostic tests for no credit, for course assessment purposes.
Yes, I use clickers - i>clickers to be specific. I have an advantage there in that our campus has been using them for a long time, in Physics since ~ 1999, in Chemistry (my department) and Biology since 2003, and in the last year or so their use has propagated out of the science departments and into Humanities and Social Sciences. We've got something like 12,000 students (out of 29000) on this campus using them now. So our students only need to buy one clicker and (we hope) keep it until they graduate.
(Not everyone who uses clickers here really uses them for interactive engagement, though. A few faculty, I have been told, use them primarily to track attendance, and more than a few simply pose the questions, collect the responses, maybe discuss the answer quickly and then go back to lecturing. )
I've been involved with some problem-based learning science classrooms. I agree that the earlier you start this sort of thing, the better. Unfortunately, the point you *should* be starting this is elementary school. Perhaps the implementation of this at the freshman-in-college level could have been better, but despite the fact the expectations were clear, the students reacted horribly.
As far as reading the book goes, I would like to differ on that opinion. I myself very seldom understand readings from the text and find the only useful thing for me is to study the example problems and derivations. When I confessed this to a very dear friend of mine (who earned degrees from Caltech, Cambridge, and Berkeley), he said I shouldn't feel bad because he'd not opened a single text his entire college or grad school career. For people with a global/visual-spatial learning perspective, it's often easier to figure out problems by intuition than spending many wasted hours reading a text that really does nothing to enhance their learning.