I think this is a really interesting idea and I tried this a few years
back in the university classroom in my Carpentries' style courses (i.e.,
https://www.programmingforbiologists.org/ &
http://www.datacarpentry.org/semester-biology/). I found that the
classic approach of watching videos in advance and then jumping straight
into exercises in class was great for the top 20% of students. They had
basically processed things successfully on the first exposure (the
videos) and enjoyed getting to immediately apply it. It did not work as
well for the bottom 50% of students. Watching the videos had given them
a useful first exposure, but lacking the well developed scaffolding to
hang that information on it had already started to fade and they
couldn't immediately apply it. They wouldn't speak up about not getting
it quickly enough and would struggle.
As a result I ended up switching to teaching my university classes on
this just like we teach workshops, but with just a little more
assumption of having seen the basic idea before in readings/videos.
Students view the material in advance. I then provide a brief overview
of the first topic and show one or two examples. The students then work
on an example that builds on what I just demonstrated and we iterate
this way throughout the class period. This feels a little slower to the
top 20% of students, but I've found it to be more effective for everyone
else.
This is also in a fairly ideal setting for this kind of approach in that
the students are graded so there is external pressure to come prepared
and the exercises we do in class count towards their grades. All of this
is to say that based on my (certainly limited) experience doing things
both ways in the university classroom that the I do, we do, you do,
style of the current workshops may end up being the best approach.
That said experimentation is always good and I like Greg's idea of a
fusion as a possible approach to letting students move at different
speeds and potentially learn different material. We should just pay
attention to make sure that this doesn't end up leaving the folks behind
that need us the most.
Ethan
On 03/14/2018 07:39 AM, Greg Wilson wrote:
I like the idea of flipping the Carpentry classroom as well, but I
think the first day or two should still use our regular approach: for
many learners, the biggest benefit of a workshop is the way it helps
them get over the FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) they feel
whenever they try to get computers to be useful, and I don't think
that starting with videos will accomplish that.
An experiment I'd really like to try is a regular two-day workshop
immediately followed by the same people working side-by-side in the
same classroom through a series of video lessons, with the helpers
still there to assist them whenever they hit a stumbling block.
Different learners could go at different speeds, or even through
(somewhat) different material, but they would still get the social
benefits of working alongside their peers, and the instructional
benefits of one-to-one assistance when most needed. I haven't been
able to find anything in the educational research literature
describing this hybrid model, but I'd be willing to bet a dollar that
it would outperform either of the pure alternatives, and I believe
that at least some learners would be willing to sign up for a
week-long hands-on workshop in this format between semesters or over
the summer.
Cheers,
Greg
On 2018-03-14 12:21 AM, Kunal Marwaha wrote:
This is a sweet idea. We already have a few videos up on the website:
https://software-carpentry.org/lessons/#video
I often find (especially with free workshops) that many learners do
not prepare (a significant portion do not even install software
beforehand). I would not expect many learners to watch videos before
they come to class.
I find in-person Q&A/debugging and exercises to be very useful parts
of the workshop. When I teach the collaboration part of Git ([usually
in line with
this](http://swcarpentry.github.io/git-novice/08-collab/)) I have
pairs of learners do a number of exercises (collaborator clones,
edits, commits & pushes; owner pulls; owner edits, commits & pushes;
both edit, commit, push at same time; both edit same line, commit,
push) at their own pace. The helpers & I check in with each group
periodically and debug / discuss concepts, conflicts in git, and so
on. This takes 30-45 minutes, and if some learners are advanced, I
ask them to explore GitHub's UI, merges, pull requests, and so on.
This environment is most similar to the "flipped classroom" that I've
seen Software Carpentry taught.
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:07 AM, Peter Steinbach
<steinb...@scionics.de <mailto:steinb...@scionics.de>> wrote:
Hi to all,
I was discussing the idea of an "inverted class room" teaching
approach with a friend of mine who is a high school teacher (he
uses that based on video recordings for his students ... just
awesome AFAIK). I was hence wondering, if people have tried to
teach the carpentry lessons in this way?
This would mean, that I record some of the parts of a carpentry
lesson in video(s) (10-15 minute each) and ask the students to
watch these videos before the carpentry bootcamp! The in-presence
part of the workshop is then used to do exercises and try to
fortify the content of the videos.
For me the biggest advantage of this approach is, that each
learner can overcome the initial steep learning curve given their
own speed of learning - which is a constant source of trouble
when I teach.
Looking forward to your feedback -
Peter
--
Peter Steinbach, Dr. rer. nat.
Scientific Software Engineer, Scientific Computing Facility
Scionics Computer Innovation GmbH
Löscherstr. 16
01309 Dresden
Germany
phone +49 351 210 2882 <tel:%2B49%20351%20210%202882>
fax +49 351 202 707 04 <tel:%2B49%20351%20202%20707%2004>
www.scionics.de <http://www.scionics.de>
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Dresden (Main office)
Amtsgericht - Registergericht: Dresden HRB 20337 (Commercial
Registry)
Ust-IdNr.: DE813263791 (VAT ID Number)
Geschäftsführer: John Duperon, Jeff Oegema (Managing Directors)
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org
<mailto:Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org>
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
<http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
--
If you cannot be brave – and it is often hard to be brave – be kind.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
