How Not To Flip
In this post I would like to deal with the classroom half of the flipped classroom. What type of homework that is given, be it a video, a reading or practice questions, is almost irrelevant to my musings today. The main purpose of this post is to show two examples of what a flipped math classroom can look like. One is a constructivist environment and the other is a Khan Academy classroom. I think most people will find the difference to be quite shocking.
First, let’s take a look at Khan Academy. This is apparently some type of pilot school with Mr. Khan being involved, so there can be little doubt that this is the type of thing they are looking for:
Here are a few things I’d like to point out and have you consider for analysis:
0:27 student gets help from the teacher (not fellow students) 0:32 “less lecturing more interaction”. I don’t see ANY interaction 1:00 watching a video to learn 2:00 “all working on different things” Is this a good thing? 2:30 the teacher is monitoring, not interacting. Compare to the teacher in the next video 3:43 He is actually saying some of the right things, but at this point time it doesn’t appear that his program does what he wants.
Now please have a look at what I would consider to be a constructivist math classroom. This particular example would be considered problem based learning (PBL). This is entirely different from learning from doing “practice problems.” PBL involves an open-ended and often ill-defined problem, where the exploration of the problem necessarily results in learning.
Now consider the points below for your analysis:
0:00 starts off with a question, not transmission (video lecture) 1:30 kids working together, teacher asks probing questions, not answers 2:00 knows that the kids are doing, doesn’t need a blue bar 2:15 kids working together, not solo 2:25 conflict – learners need to face a conflict and remediate it 3:00 let the kids struggle, don’t show a video with the answer 4:30 some kids are moving towards algebraic expressions (pacing, differentiation) 5:30 “better than tests” [ie Khan quiz questions for levels] 5:55 “he helps you but he doesn’t give away the answer”
I think the key issues in this second video, when compared to the first, are:
1. Lack of transmission teaching: learning by lecture (video) vs learning by doing. Don’t be fooled by Khan Academy: the kids are repeating what they learned in their video by doing practice questions. In the 2nd video the kids are finding out for themselves what they will learn. The teacher in the 2nd video does not give answers, he follows up questions with more questions.
2. The 2nd video has a lot of social learning, where students share ideas, thoughts, and teach and learn from each other
3. a teacher can know what is going on in their classroom without a computer program to tell them
4. Self-pacing sounds wonderful, but how can students interact and problem solve together, if everyone is doing something different? The second video shows students learning at different levels, and there can be differentiation.
5. The Khan Academy video combined with what I read about KA badges or points program, shows that behaviourism is a fundamental part of the KA learning theory. Others may disagree with me, but I personally cannot stand behaviourist models in learning. 60+ years of research and results have shown that behaviourism is not the way towards life-long learning.
I for one hope that my kids never have a class like that shown in the first video
Just to be clear: I am not equating the Khan Academy classroom with other flipped classrooms that use video. I’m also not trying to paint Khan Academy with one brush. Not only is KA uploading thousands of videos that may be helpful to people but they are also trying to do some neat things: http://www.khanacademy.org/talks-and-interviews/v/ideal-math-and-science-class-time.
Note that when the video ends, you’re told that you’re earning points by watching the video… ie behaviourism.
Overall, I’m a bit miffed as to why we are using the term “Flipped Classroom” at all. Dismissing the homework aspect, isn’t the FC just a constructivist classroom? I started thinking about this here, and like Brian E. Bennett says, we should be changing the discussion.