At the end of this past class, I found myself with lots and lots of questions. Here are some of the big ones I've been thinking about since then:
How does this model clash with the concept of Obchenie?
This class came on the heels of our discussion of the interrelational nature of teaching/learning as it was understood by Vygotsky. He saw the social nature of education as a crucial aspect of the act of learning. At first glance, it seems that flipping the classroom would take away from the social nature of learning by making instruction one-sided. But after listening to Khan speak, it became clear that putting the stand and deliver model aside actually creates much more time for direct, one-on-one interaction in the learning environment. And not just between teacher and student, but between peers, a practice that is known to positively impact students of all abilities and levels. My concern with this model is that introducing new topics in an environment outside of teacher control makes it much harder for teacher to intervene with initial confusion. Because instruction happens independently, Teacher won't see confused expressions or misunderstanding until later in the learning process, which could make it more difficult to undo misunderstanding.
How does student responsibility get built?
One of the key assumptions to this model is that students are engaging with the outside of class time material responsibly and appropriately. They are watching the instructional videos, and they are doing so in an manner that supports their learning (i.e. limiting distractions, eyes and ears open, taking notes, monitoring their understanding, pausing and re-watching as needed, etc.). Thinking back to my own teenage delinquency, I wonder how long it would take to build up the skills and motivation required to use this model effectively. I wasn't a bad student, but I was busy. I might have felt resentment for being asked to do something that I viewed as the teacher's responsibility.
How does the flipped classroom impact student's relationship with inquiry?
When instruction is scripted and fixed, it must impact student's relationship with curiosity. Being able to raise a hand, interrupt instruction and ask a question seems to me to be an important aspect of learning. Teacher's willingness to go on a tangent and honour a student's curiosity mid-lesson will impact their relationship with open-ended learning and inquiry. Furthermore, Teacher's ability to build student-directed inquiry into the flipped-classroom model is altered. The time it takes to make and edit new instructional videos will increase the turn-around time for incorporating student-chosen material. Furthermore, critical thinking seemed to be missing from much of the instruction in Khan's talk. Students were given all of the information they needed, and (at least from what we saw), very little attention was paid to developing those skills around self-learning and critical engagement.
Can this model be partially implemented in a way that still meaningfully benefits students?
Here I am wondering about the efficacy of implementing something like this half-way or part-time. I suspect that asking students to switch frequently between very different educational models would be difficult and stressful. While it would be nice to cherry-pick the best aspects of each model, I have doubts about the way this elements would fit together.
How does this model impact teacher load?
Learning to script, record, create, edit and upload video instruction is a huge undertaking. Even if Teacher chooses to use existing recorded instruction, there is still the mammoth task of finding and curating these videos into a syllabus. This represents a lot of time and energy allocated to the "behind the scenes" aspects of teaching. If not implementing an existing flipped-classroom program, a new teacher would be overwhelmed at best.
Where are the arts? What is the hidden curriculum regarding fine art and arts education?
This is a more broad pedagogical question regarding the efficacy of a flipped model for Arts and Fine Arts education. The same pitfalls I've identified regarding inquiry are multiplied when talking about more dynamic and open-ended material. The more right answers there are, the harder it is to create a one-size-fits all instructional guide. Is it possible to make a video lecture that teaches students to develop meaningful literary critique? For plastic and performance art, the flipped model has major flaws. Much of fine art education centers around technique. You simply cannot teach someone to dance in a video, because you need to see their body in order to instruct.
How does this model clash with the concept of Obchenie?
This class came on the heels of our discussion of the interrelational nature of teaching/learning as it was understood by Vygotsky. He saw the social nature of education as a crucial aspect of the act of learning. At first glance, it seems that flipping the classroom would take away from the social nature of learning by making instruction one-sided. But after listening to Khan speak, it became clear that putting the stand and deliver model aside actually creates much more time for direct, one-on-one interaction in the learning environment. And not just between teacher and student, but between peers, a practice that is known to positively impact students of all abilities and levels. My concern with this model is that introducing new topics in an environment outside of teacher control makes it much harder for teacher to intervene with initial confusion. Because instruction happens independently, Teacher won't see confused expressions or misunderstanding until later in the learning process, which could make it more difficult to undo misunderstanding.
How does student responsibility get built?
One of the key assumptions to this model is that students are engaging with the outside of class time material responsibly and appropriately. They are watching the instructional videos, and they are doing so in an manner that supports their learning (i.e. limiting distractions, eyes and ears open, taking notes, monitoring their understanding, pausing and re-watching as needed, etc.). Thinking back to my own teenage delinquency, I wonder how long it would take to build up the skills and motivation required to use this model effectively. I wasn't a bad student, but I was busy. I might have felt resentment for being asked to do something that I viewed as the teacher's responsibility.
How does the flipped classroom impact student's relationship with inquiry?
When instruction is scripted and fixed, it must impact student's relationship with curiosity. Being able to raise a hand, interrupt instruction and ask a question seems to me to be an important aspect of learning. Teacher's willingness to go on a tangent and honour a student's curiosity mid-lesson will impact their relationship with open-ended learning and inquiry. Furthermore, Teacher's ability to build student-directed inquiry into the flipped-classroom model is altered. The time it takes to make and edit new instructional videos will increase the turn-around time for incorporating student-chosen material. Furthermore, critical thinking seemed to be missing from much of the instruction in Khan's talk. Students were given all of the information they needed, and (at least from what we saw), very little attention was paid to developing those skills around self-learning and critical engagement.
Can this model be partially implemented in a way that still meaningfully benefits students?
Here I am wondering about the efficacy of implementing something like this half-way or part-time. I suspect that asking students to switch frequently between very different educational models would be difficult and stressful. While it would be nice to cherry-pick the best aspects of each model, I have doubts about the way this elements would fit together.
How does this model impact teacher load?
Learning to script, record, create, edit and upload video instruction is a huge undertaking. Even if Teacher chooses to use existing recorded instruction, there is still the mammoth task of finding and curating these videos into a syllabus. This represents a lot of time and energy allocated to the "behind the scenes" aspects of teaching. If not implementing an existing flipped-classroom program, a new teacher would be overwhelmed at best.
Where are the arts? What is the hidden curriculum regarding fine art and arts education?
This is a more broad pedagogical question regarding the efficacy of a flipped model for Arts and Fine Arts education. The same pitfalls I've identified regarding inquiry are multiplied when talking about more dynamic and open-ended material. The more right answers there are, the harder it is to create a one-size-fits all instructional guide. Is it possible to make a video lecture that teaches students to develop meaningful literary critique? For plastic and performance art, the flipped model has major flaws. Much of fine art education centers around technique. You simply cannot teach someone to dance in a video, because you need to see their body in order to instruct.
Comments
Post a Comment