If you are new to active learning strategies, please [please, please, please] do not attempt to try everything all at once! It should be obvious, but that's a recipe for failure. That and improper implementation are the primary sources of frustrations such as "those methods don't work for me." Evidence now shows that research-validated interactive learning strategies can benefit ALL students in ALL classroom environments. But...the quality of our implementation is likely the most deterministic factor toward student achievement.
So choose one thing to focus on (Think-Pair-Share is typically considered the "gateway drug") and practice proper implementation until you are comfortable enough to add an additional component.
Remember to ask for help! You aren't the first to need assistance and you won't be the last. Even experienced implementers are always asking questions and seeking guidance. Don't go it alone!
Simply put, it's not if you don't develop the learning sequence appropriately. But you can turn using a video clip, simulator, or demonstration into an active-learning scenario. The key is to not simply show off what the simulator can do or how the demo plays out or just play the video. You must first get your students invested by setting up various situations and then require them to make predictions about what will happen before they see it occur in the sim, demo, or video.
The teachable moment can only occur here if you appropriately build up the situation, get the students invested, and then leave them hanging for a little bit. It might seem somewhat devious (as if you're "getting back" at them) but it is a critically necessary component: it's your job to make them want to know what will happen so badly that they go a little bit bonkers. Otherwise they have no "skin in the game" so to speak, and no motivation for actively trying to think through and understand the processes and interactions rather than passively watching the outcomes happen without thinking about them.
Sometimes I require students to record their predictions and turn them in before proceeding with the demo or sim (like with Kirchhoff's thermal radiation laws). In these cases I assign low-stakes participation credit simply for following the instructions and providing predictions that are reasonable given the context. Other times I do it as a no-stakes part of my "interactive lecture" during the mini-lecture part of a learning sequence (like with Doppler shift). The expandables below describe these examples.
Regardless, NEVER try this for the first time on the fly in class without having practiced first! This is a big deal! We must always do our homework: watch the video all the way through multiple times and make notes; do the demonstration yourself multiple times; play with the simulator until you know exactly what all of the switches, bells, and whistles do and feel completely comfortable operating it. If you don't practice first, not only do you not know what you need them to make predictions about (kind of the point!) but you also run the risk of a major flop in front of your class, wasting a lot of precious class time, and alienating the students from that concept (and maybe even you and the course in general!) – possibly irrevocably.
During their mini-lecture (video for the online sections; in person for the f2f sections) I remind them of the three types of spectra (continuous, emission, and absorption) and show them a graphic of Kirchhoff's laws in action (the physical conditions that result in the different spectra). I remind them that it's the path that the photons take along a line of sight to you that matters. Then I tell them that we're about do a demonstration but that I'll need their help to figure out what's going on.
I tell them that I'm going to describe some situations and they have to predict which type of spectrum will result. This will be graded as a participation exercise: they get credit only if they follow the instructions and make reasonable predictions, one for each of the three situations, regardless of whether their answers are correct.
With the equipment out where they can see it, I show them the components while describing each of the three situations. The online students are told to write their predictions down somewhere because they'll need to enter their responses into an online "quiz" that must be submitted before they can continue with their lessons and view the demonstration. The f2f students write their predictions on a piece of paper and must turn it in before I do the demo.
Here is one example of how I do it in an online environment. In a f2f class, I have the equipment on the desk at the front of the room.
Once I've collected all the papers in the f2f class I do the demonstration. When a student in an online section has submitted his/her prediction "quiz" s/he now has access to the demonstration video clip.
Here is one example of how I do it in an online environment. In a f2f class, everyone gets his/her own diffraction grating and I do the demo from the desk at the front of the darkened room.
Especially in a f2f class make sure, in each case, to have them tell you what they predicted ahead of time and why – explain the reasoning. Then when they see the resulting spectrum, also have them describe to you exactly what happened to produce that result. (Obviously this part loses a little something in the asynchronous online version but you can tell that I still tried to [sort of] do it.)
An in-depth debrief isn't always necessary since it depends on how things went but do always make sure to ask if they have any questions or need any clarifications on anything.
Re: Grading the Exercise:
This participation exercise is always out of three points and a student gets a point for each prediction, assuming it's reasonable (i.e. one of the three types of spectra and not some bizarre term or phrase that shows s/he wasn't prepared). Since the learning management system used in the online environment grades for right and wrong answers, I have to go back in after the fact and make manual adjustments accordingly.
During their mini-lecture (video for the online sections; in person for the f2f sections) I remind them of the basic principles behind the Doppler effect and highlight the facts that (1) this is a perceived shift in the wavelength (or frequency), not an actual change in the emitted wave and (2) changes are only perceived when there is relative motion along the line of sight between the source and observer. Then I tell them that we have a simulator that we can use to check whether we understand what's going on. I'll control it but I need their help making sense of it.
I tell them that I'm going to describe some situations and they have to predict what will happen, e.g. will the wavelength change or stay the same?, appear longer or shorter?, etc. I don't make them write anything down or grade it. I also do multiple situations with multiple predictions so there is a lot of back and forth with this one.
Here is one example of how I do it in an online environment. In a f2f class, I simply have the simulator displayed on the screen at the front of the room.
In a f2f section, if I don't get the desired level of participation when I ask for a prediction, I won't proceed and instead will say something like, "That wasn't enough of you. Let's try it again." Then I'll repeat my original question until I get an acceptable level of participation. Once I get that prediction from them I will show the result. Remember: don't proceed until you have an acceptable level of participation in making the predictions. Otherwise you're just lecturing with a fancier "slide" and they're not thinking about what's actually occurring. (Obviously this part loses a little something in the asynchronous online version but you can tell that I still tried to [sort of] do it.)
Especially in a f2f class make sure to have them explain the reasoning behind their predictions. Then when they see the results and – especially if it differs from what they predicted – get them to explain exactly what occurred to cause the result.
An in-depth debrief isn't always necessary since it depends on how things went but do always make sure to ask if they have any questions or need any clarifications on anything.
Students do whatever pre-class preparation you've assigned. In class you give a mini-lecture that reminds them of the nature of light, what the electromagnetic spectrum is, and what the different regions of the spectrum mean. You probably begin the discussion of how we can "see" the other regions of the spectrum even though human eyes can't perceive those wavelengths ("false color" maps). Ask them questions about how the wavelengths, frequencies, and energies of IR light compare with other parts of the spectrum, etc. Then tell them that we're about to watch a video clip on IR light and they need to pay close attention to how the infrared radiation is indicated because they're going to have to use that information to make some predictions.
Watch this video up until the point it stops [1:52]. Then have a short class discussion: ask them how that image (where the video stopped) would look if it were instead imaged in infrared light. What colors would hot things be? Cold things? They can't say "light" or "dark" because those aren't colors! In doing this, we establish a false color map and scale and in just a few moments, they'll get to see if they were right.
Now they see whether they were correct about the first set of predictions. Continue the video until it stops again (about three seconds) and you can have a discussion and debrief about what they predicted and what's indicated in actual the false color image.
Tell them they're not done making predictions so when we resume the video they still need to pay close attention.
In some instances, we provided them with a worksheet that has a two-column table: kinds of animals on the left (snake, zebra, rhinocerous, etc.) and empty boxes on the right. This is so they can choose three animals and describe what they think those animals – all parts of them, including things like horns and stripes – will look like in the infrared, remembering that our false color map is based on temperature. Then we resume the video until it stops again [1:15]. They have to make their predictions and turn them in (participation credit) before we proceed.
We can have another short discussion where we ask things like "who chose a snake? zebra?" and get them to describe what they think it should look like. It's all about what kinds of information you want them to realize and understand (because you did your homework and watched the video beforehand several times) and how much class time you can afford to spend here. Then you can resume the video to give them the punch line [0:46].
Any additional debrief is up to you. (Watch the full video [6:45] from start to finish here).
You probably have some that you like and/or use already so it's likely just a matter of figuring out how to create the appropriate scenarios for requiring predictions. Remember to practice! (See above.)
As you probably know, the reliability of interactive content on the web has been historically tricky (JavaScript, Flash, etc.) so a lot of the simulators might not function as expected in all browsers (and some simply won't work at all).
|
general site © Rica Sirbaugh French 2017-18 |
|
last edited: |