by Anita Toh

The Blended Learning Seminar on 27 September 2018 offered many thoughts for consideration. This post is a record of my takeaways from the discussion among the 5 panellists (Aileen Lum, Jessie Teng, Katy Kan, Natalie Hudson and Shobha Avadhani), and some 20 participants.

The seminar started with a clear message: the session was not meant to convert non-believers into flipping advocates. Instead, it was meant to be a platform for us to share and learn from each other’s research and experience.

Should I flip my class? Here are the 5 things I should consider:

 

1. Does it fit into the module’s pedagogical framework?

Katy Kan shared that her ES2002 Business Communication for Leaders module adopts a workplace simulation approach as their pedagogical design. For the entire semester, the students take on the role of management trainees at a company, and course assessments come in the form of workplace communication tasks. The module meets for 3 hours once a week, and in each meeting, students are thrown into the deep end and expected to perform various communication tasks, such as presenting a pitch or critique sample business reports. Students are therefore expected to come to class prepared by reading or viewing recommended resources. The flipped learning format provides the mode for this teaching approach.

To me, the message here is that it is not about trying to fit our module into the flipped learning format, but rather how to use the flipped learning format to support or produce the learning outcomes that we want to achieve.

 

2. We do not always/necessarily have to assess or monitor the online learning component.

A common concern about flipping is how do we ensure the students actually do the required preparation prior to attending class? A common answer is to award some marks for such work, which may come in the form of a short quiz or a worksheet or forum discussion. To keep tutor’s workload manageable, such quizzes may be automated and auto-graded.

But an interesting idea arose from the panel discussion – we do not necessarily have to check on the students’ online work. The online work is meant to lead into the face-to-face session. So, what’s important is to design the face-to-face session activities so that the students have to do the online work in order to produce something for the face-to-face session. We need to set expectations right from the start of the semester – that if they do not prepare for the face-to-face session, they will perform badly.

For example, schedule a graded product demo presentation for the face-to-face session, and award marks for specific elements highlighted in the recommended resources. Students who take the time to view the recommended resources and prepare accordingly would perform better. Or have them examine an authentic user manual online with the guide of a worksheet, then in class, present their findings to the class, and work in groups to come up with guidelines for writing audience-focused user manuals.

So, to ensure that they do the online portion of the work, the online work should not be merely reading/viewing and coming to class to discuss, but instead, it should be reading/viewing, complete worksheet and produce something for class.

 

3. We do not necessarily have to create videos for the online materials.

We could also use curated videos, infographics, reading materials, etc. In fact, in a focus group study of 20 NUS students who provided feedback on the Strategies for Clear and Concise Writing e-learning videos, a number of the students commented that some of the material in the videos could have been more effectively and efficiently presented as a simple infographic. Indeed, a number of the panellists also shared that they use curated videos and online reading resources. Katy Kan remarked that professional and expert resources and ideas are so easily obtainable online and so disruptive these days, we need not be reinventing the wheel. Instead, we should be making the best of these available resources from experts all over the world.

But this gives rise to the question: If we’re using curated material, where does our CELC input/content come in? Aileen and Happy shared Associate Professor’s Erle Lim’s idea of lecturers providing commentaries on curated videos to help students think through the curated content; notice important patterns, connections and ideas; and draw conclusions relevant to the learning outcomes of the lesson (for those of us who have studied Literature, this is akin to creating Cliff’s Notes for the curated materials).

In short, we need not be the content experts. It is ok to curate materials, but what is important is how to make sense of the material and use them to produce learning outcomes.

 

4. We need to teach students how to maximise learning from a flipped module.

A concern raised was that flipped learning may be most effective for the more proficient and more self-regulated and motivated students who can work independently. The weaker students who need more spoon-feeding may be left behind. An interesting notion raised in the discussion was that it is possible that the weaker students need handholding in how to operate effectively in a flipped environment, rather than spoon-feeding. Students get lost in an online environment because they are not sure where to start, what to do, how to regulate their learning process. If we can provide very clear and specific guidelines and instructions on how to maximise learning from a flipped model, how to navigate resources, how to check their own learning, it may be possible to empower them to regulate their own learning.

In the same vein, Natalie Hudson shared that it is important that the online materials are systematically and carefully organized so that they are easily accessible to students. This would mean using the Lesson Plan function in the IVLE.

 

5. Can we achieve the same learning outcomes with flipping?

Many are concerned about whether flipping would produce better learning outcomes. Much of the literature that report positive learning outcomes from flipping compare flipped to traditional lecture-based classrooms. The few studies that compared flipped learning to active learning classrooms concluded that what makes a difference in learning outcome is the active learning component, regardless of whether the class is flipped or not[1]. So, many, including me, are asking how is flipping better than the active learning that we are already doing now?

Seeing that the university is increasingly encouraging flipped modules, and that students have expressed a preference for once-a-week tutorials, perhaps instead of asking if flipping can produce better learning outcomes, perhaps the question we need to be asking ourselves is whether flipping would enable us to produce the same learning outcomes? Jessie Teng shared that comparing her many years of teaching on regular courses with her current flipped module, she has not noticed any significant difference in learning outcomes.

At the end of the seminar, I felt that I was able to consider flipping CS2101 without feeling that I may be short-changing my students. I came away from the seminar feeling assured and loaded with a sense of empowerment.

I feel assured because I learned that:

• Flipping our 2-hour twice a week modules need not mean that we allocate 2 hours for online learning, and end up with only 2 hours of face-to-face class time. We may instead adopt the 1 hour online learning and 3 hours face-to-face class time.
• Flipping need not mean that we will end up doing more work monitoring the students’ online learning. We should instead focus on designing online learning activities that lead in to the face-to-face sessions. Such activities should not merely be read and come to class to discuss. It should be read, prepare and come to class to present or produce.

I feel empowered because I no longer feel forced into flipping my module. I look at it now as an opportunity for research. Flipped learning is still new to us at CELC. It is up to us to shape and define it to achieve our teaching and learning objectives. This seminar is a start to get us thinking about the possibilities. Now the challenge is to see if we can find out how and whether it works for our type of students and our type of modules.

To do this effectively, we will need management support – perhaps discount the student evaluation for the first semester we flip our module so that we may experiment without fear.

Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. D. M. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(1), ar5.