by Aileen Lam
In the previous posts written by Jonathan Tan and Jock Onn, some important issues about the flipped classroom were raised. The flipped classroom has indeed become a source of contention and uncertainty.
“Is it totally innovative and novel?”
If we view the flipped classroom merely as a way to move classroom instruction in the form of pre-recorded lessons online so that class time is used for higher-order collaborative activities (Bergman & Sams, 2012), then, no, it is not innovative. I agree with my colleagues that this approach is a “common-sense approach”. I thoroughly agree that this is akin to students reading their notes and preparing for class which is similar to other teaching approaches such as inverted learning (Davis, 2013), the inverted classroom (Lage & Platt, 2000) and the assignment-based model (Walvoord & Anderson, 1998). All these approaches emphasise preparation and groundwork before class. The only difference between the traditional method and the flipped classroom is the platform in which information is transmitted and created. In the past, we created notes and printed them out for the students. With the flipped classroom, we create videos for students and distribute learning material online (see O’Flaherty & Phillips, 2015; Hsieh, Wu, & Marek, 2017 for examples). The essence is similar although the presentation of information and the mode of transfer is different. If we follow the “definitions” of the flipped classroom strictly, then there really isn’t anything novel about this approach.
However, if we go past the use of technology to distribute learning material (i.e. IVLE as a platform to distribute videos and notes) and the use of technology to create materials with direct instruction (i.e. voice-over slides, animation videos) to supplement print we can and should facilitate learning by harnessing the interactivity and timeliness that technological platforms offer. In my opinion, the flipped classroom is only one of the pedagogical approaches to blended learning (Hung, 2015). Our focus should not only be on creating and distributing videos for pre-class learning, but we should also consider an overall strategy that facilitates learning online pre- and post-class.
What is novel about the use of technology to facilitate learning is the ability for students to interact with the learning material, their peers and tutors to get timely feedback. This can be done synchronously (i.e. online chat) or asynchronously (i.e. discussion forum) but it doesn’t stop there. The type of feedback provided can also be personalised through individual tutor feedback or programmed through hints, results and answers from quizzes. Instead of focusing only on the passive watching of videos, it is possible for students to engage in active learning through other activities such as online quizzes. I do agree, that it is possible for tutors to print a quiz and provide the answers for the students before they come to class. However, a student can read all the answers and choose not to attempt the questions which defeats the purpose of a quiz. With technology, we can withhold the answers until they have attempted the quiz and we can program the release of hints or useful information at key junctures which makes the feedback timely. Even with the use of notes or videos, we can inject quizzes at key moments which is akin to a tutor asking questions in class to test understanding or get feedback (this feature is available on IVLE). This helps students consolidate and apply what they have learnt.
Furthermore, tutors can track students’ progress by looking at their engagement rates (e.g. who watched the videos and how long they watched the videos for) on IVLE and even how they respond to quizzes and discussions (e.g. Were their answers correct? Did they apply the theories accurately?). We could then discuss challenging questions in class and use the engagement data to inform further instruction and class activities.
“Do our students really know how to work with media in education just because they are a tech-savvy generation?”
I think that our students who are digital natives are probably more comfortable with technology than most of us who are digital immigrants (Prensky, 2001). These digital natives comprehend and process information in a different way from us. They have shorter attention spans and prefer graphics rather than text (Carlson, 2005; Smith, 2012) and hence videos and infographics may be useful for them. However, I agree that students may not know how to use media to learn effectively. That is why I strongly believe that there should be facilitation and guided interaction with the content and materials instead of focusing only on producing media in the form of videos.
Our focus should then shift from the flipped classroom to an overall strategy for blended learning which is the careful assimilation of activities that take place synchronously in class and asynchronously online (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004).
“Has the flipped classroom been used as an excuse to cram more content into an already overcrowded curriculum?”
I believe that this has happened and will continue to happen if we are not careful. It is the role of the tutor to decide what information is absolutely important and what information is peripheral. We can differentiate our learning materials and clearly state their purposes.
If we stop to think about it, this problem does not exist only in a flipped classroom. Tutors who do not plan the curriculum and syllabus carefully would also end up with an overcrowded curriculum with insufficient class time. What happens next is an expectation of students to complete their readings and learn outside the classroom. In such instances, I do not believe that the curriculum designer or tutor has ill intent. There probably is a lot of information that may seem important but there are time constraints in class. Unfortunately, the flipped component provides a convenient space to park this curriculum.
Let’s look at this from a different angle. If we assume that curriculum is designed optimally, we can make use of the online space to share materials for students of varying ability and needs. We could produce varied content (Levy, 2008) by including extra materials for weaker students who may not have the same level of cognition as their peers or have sufficient exposure to necessary concepts and theories before they approach common learning materials. We could also introduce content that goes beyond the curriculum for students who may be interested to learn more or want to be challenged cognitively.
What is more important is how we use technology to aid each student. If we provide differentiated content, students have the autonomy to decide if they want to engage in it and this moves away from the traditional teacher-centred model (Flipped Learning Network, 2014).
“Does the flipped classroom really give students (and tutors) more free time?
It has been argued that the flipped classroom reduces contact time but I agree with my colleagues that it doesn’t actually translate to more free time for the students or reduce their workload (or ours). However, I believe that students and tutors can be fairly compensated.
In the context of NUS and the module that I teach, FAS1101, the students still receive four modular credits when they complete the course even though we only meet once a week because of the work that they do outside the physical classroom.
If we look at it from a financial point of view, it is true that students who pay the same tuition fees have less face-to-face contact time with their tutors and peers but that does not necessarily mean a drop in the quality of learning. I personally prefer meeting my students and facilitating discussions in person. However, I try to simulate interaction through discussions and activities online because I have been tasked to teach a flipped module. When we face directives and constraints, we need to consider how best to help our students learn and receive returns on their investments.
This brings me to an important point that the tutors who teach on a flipped module could be doing as much work as those teaching traditional modules with full contact time if they are continuously engaging students and facilitating learning online. Jock Onn has rightly pointed out that some part-time tutors may not “find it financially worthwhile to teach a flipped class” especially if their remuneration is based on actual contact time. The good news is that CELC is exploring ways to compensate tutors more fairly, for example, by considering their facilitation of online discussions. As NUS moves towards the flipped model, we need to work closely with management to discuss the workload of curriculum designers and tutors as well as the impact it has on full-time and part-time tutors.
“What is the impact of a flipped English language classroom?”
There are not many studies done on the flipped classroom in the context of an English Language or Communications module. Of the few that do, it generally highlights a positive perception of the flipped classroom but there is insufficient information and data on actual student learning outcomes. Since NUS and CELC seem to be moving towards the flipped classroom, this actually presents an opportunity for us to find out more. If life gives us lemons, let’s make lemonade!
“How do I flip my module?”
You may want to create learning materials that appeal to our digital native students. Here are some tools and websites that I personally found useful.
Video making
1. Voice-over slides
This is a good way to start on video production because we are quite comfortable with the use of slides. Microsoft PowerPoint has the function to record a slideshow with narration. You can even insert your video (i.e. talking head) or even screen recordings. The good thing about this software is that the recordings are for each slide. This makes it easy to make changes without having to re-record the entire video.
You can use the following websites to find out how to use the recording function within Microsoft PowerPoint since Microsoft Office Mix has been discontinued.
2. Animation videos
In my opinion, biteable is the easiest to use in terms of making explainer-type/ animation videos. You can choose a template, insert the words, choose the music and create your video quite easily. Some colleagues have also recommended the use of Powtoon.
https://www.powtoon.com/home/?
https://www.videoscribe.co/en/
I have made quite a few videos using videoscribe which are hand-drawn videos but they take more time because you need to come up with a storyboard, visualise each sentence, look for graphics that fit your visualisation and decide on the timing for each graphic to be drawn in relation to the audio recording. However, I like the end-product.
- Adobe Premiere Pro
This is a more advanced video editing software which allows you to manipulate the visuals (e.g. brightness) and sound (e.g. trim to fit). You could put cut videos into smaller clips or place multiple videos together and create transitions between them. You could even overlay videos and include headings and subtitles. This software is available to NUS staff and needs to be downloaded. I found that it slowed my office computer down but I understand that the computer in the recording room can support this software well.
Infographics
Infographics may appeal to your students. Canva is easy to navigate with very useful tutorials for hands-on learning.
Free Images and Music
I often look for royalty-free images and music and found these websites very useful.
IVLE
You may want to find out how you can use IVLE to facilitate learning. For example, you could use the “hint” feature in quizzes and you could insert a quiz into a video. You could also find out how to track student engagement via IVLE. I referred to this website as I was figuring out the functions of IVLE.
https://wiki.nus.edu.sg/display/IVLEStaffKB/Home
CDTL also provides training courses regarding IVLE.
Final Thoughts
Prensky (2001) asked the question below:
Should the Digital Native students learn the old ways, or should their Digital Immigrant educators learn the new? Unfortunately, no matter how much the Immigrants may wish it, it is highly unlikely the Digital Natives will go backwards (p. 3).
I am of the opinion that we need to adapt to this new learning environment. However, tutors who are not yet comfortable with technology should not be rushed into producing digital content such as videos even if a flipped module needs to be rolled out. A tutor should be given the autonomy to continue with readings and use online activities such as discussions and quizzes until they become confident and proficient in technology. What is important is the educator’s overall strategy to enhance learning in and out of the classroom using technology, the management’s awareness of the work involved in creating a flipped module and the support for tutors to learn new tools and software.
References
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Carlson, S. (2005). The net generation in the classroom. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(7), A34-A37.
Chen Hsieh, J. S., Wu, W. C. V., & Marek, M. W. (2017). Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1-2), 1-21.
Davis, C. (2013). Flipped or Inverted Learning. Enhancing instruction with visual media: Utilizing video and lecture capture, 241.
Flipped Learning Network. (2014). The four pillars of F-L-I-P. Retrieved from http://flippedlearning.org/ cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdf
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education, 7(2), 95-105.
Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
Lage, M. J., & Platt, G. (2000). The internet and the inverted classroom. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 11-11.
Levy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(4), 161-164.
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Smith, E. E. (2012). The digital native debate in higher education: A comparative analysis of recent literature. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 35(3), 1-18.
Walvoord, B., & Anderson, V. (1998). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass