Dave, I do agree with all what you are saying. May be I did describe active learning but thought it was not so. I did not do any of my education in the US. All my education was in India and in my classes right from 11th grade there were class sizes over 100 and those that did not want to were not in class. But those of us that went did get some information but were forced to learn from books outside of class. We had district level exams with questions papers set by someone completely different from those that taught us. And they were all essay answers graded by another different set of instructors. SO our teachers only lectured the concepts but we had to write answers that would be understood by anyone other than just our teacher. So we could not say "I did not know what you were expecting for that question!" - a statement I am sure you have heard many students tell you after an exam. We either passed the class or failed and had to do the exams all over again if we failed. We had to make a judgement of what the grader would expect for that questions and answer rather than being spoon fed the information as to what a teacher expects from a question. We did not have socratic dialogue or any such learning techniques. I think there are quite a many of us here in the US who can vouch for lectures as being the only form of information transfer we in Indian universities experienced and continue to do so. I was and am still a shy person and I will not participate in any discussion and cannot say for sure that I learnt more in that way because I was never an active participant. So right here we have two different kinds of learners.
I have seen and have been in classes where as you said half the students do not show up and half of those in class are doing something else. I also know that using the clicker or give quizzes at the beginning or at the end of the lecture forces students to come only for the quizzes and can actually hinder the class. My feeling is that if we force anyone and in this case the students to do something that do not want to do, there will be little effect. They will resent and not actually learn stuff. But then we need not be stuck in our age old means of transferring information. Anyway, I think my point is that lectures have and will be an important way to convey information. Students that want to will learn whatever the method may be. There will be many students that will fall through cracks and I don't know how much of this we can prevent. May be it is a form of natural selection. As professors and teachers we can share information we have in many ways but eventually it is the students' responsibility to put in effort and obtain benefits from a course/class. I think the best thing we can do is get them to be responsible for what they do and what score/grade they get. And I think Dave, you will agree that our teachers from 40 or even 20 years ago did this and we did learn to take responsibility so much so that even now when students do not learn well, we take it as our responsibility which is to a some extent but not to the extent the Univs and schools make it out to be. Arathi -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] To: Arathi Seshadri <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Sent: Sun, Jan 24, 2010 12:37 pm Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] decline in education, comment on active learning Arathi, we did learn from lectures. But my professors also, forty and more years ago, used "active learning" methods. I recall being queried in class, and being expected to ask questions. I recall Socratic dialogue. I was expected to research questions and problems on my own. I do not recall 100% lectures. I recall that I learned more when I was an active participant in the process. I agree that students need to be able to work at their own pace, need to be able schedule study for a given course when it is most beneficial to them. I agree that they need to seek out alternate sources of information. I also believe from experience that I was most effective when I guided students rather than when I served as a source of information. After all, there is more information available to them than I could deliver in a set of lectures. I certainly believe, with you, that I would have been ill serving them if I limited their learning to only that information that I could personally deliver. I found lectures most useful when I could take information that was available to students in other media, and guide them to understand it better. I simply don't think that my professors were so information driven that they ignored active learning. I also think that a lot of what you described is active learning. I don't believe we should remove lectures from post-secondary education. But, be honest. How many times have you passed by a lecture hall to see half the seats empty, and another third of them occupied by sleeping people? Hmmmmm ...... . If a professor expects his or her students to read material before attending a lecture on the subject, and wishes to reward that reading with a quick quiz, students can either take advantage of that reward or not. It is up to them. David Mc On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Arathi Seshadri wrote: > I totally agree with a lot of what Jane is saying. I constantly hear > from > many of my fellow faculty about the use of active learning > methods to > improve student learning and performance. However, my > questions to us here > especially, the older ones who are faculty now or > have retired - didn't we > all learn from lectures? There was not so > much of active learning methods > those days. But we have done well. And > many of our peers have come out to > be really good > scientists/engineers/technicians.... And in my opinion this > is mainly > because of all the points Jane has just mentioned. We studied at > a > time when it was convenient to us. We were not restricted to use the > > one book recommended by the teacher. In fact we used many different > books > and in the process we got to read much more. If we had biochem > exam today > then we focused on that and worked on ecology another time. > WHy are we forcing this 'active learning' on students? As teachers we > show > the way and students going down that path will pick up a lot of > things that > interest them. The whole journey down the path is > education. Arathi > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jane Shevtsov To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, Jan 23, 2010 2:35 pm > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] decline in education, comment on active > learning > > > One problem with many active learning methods is that they constrain > when and how the student is to learn the material. In a traditional > situation, I can attend lecture/lab, read the textbook, study with > friends, study alone, decide our book sucks and use another one, look > up material online, try problems, etc. It doesn't matter what methods > I use or don't use. The only thing that matters is the result. In > particular, I've had several math professors who graded homework to > give students an incentive to do it, while also providing a way to get > an A without turning in homework -- and gave fair warning that this > was very unlikely to happen! On the other hand, active learning tends > to be method-dependent. You're graded on the intermediate steps of > learning, not just the outcome. If the methods a particular professor > decides to use don't work well for me or if I already have a good > grasp of the material, I still have to put in the time. > > Furthermore, if the professor decides that everybody needs to read the > book before coming to class and gives a daily quiz to enforce the > policy, the student has just lost some of the freedom to decide when > to study. Maybe I find it helpful to have a lecture overview of the > material before reading the more detailed book. Maybe I just have a > big biochemistry exam and need to focus on that for a few days. Thus, > many active learning methods have a paradoxical effect. By drawing > attention to the process of learning as opposed to the outcome, they > make the student more dependent on the professor for structuring their > learning experience. > > Despite all of the above, I am not opposed to all active learning > methods. In particular, I had a physiology professor in undergrad who > would interrupt himself during lecture and start evaluating an idea > he'd thought of or asking a question and trying to reason out the > answer, thus modeling the process for us. This, plus the fact that he > told the class on day one that he expected us to make mistakes and > that these were just part of learning, really got people to ask > questions and speak up in class -- and imposed no extra constraints. I > myself, as a TA, have inflicted a journal assignment on ecosystem > ecology students in which they were asked to wrestle with class > material, ask questions and draw connections with their daily > experiences or other classes. (This journal was only a small part of > their grade and I gave substantive feedback, in the form of letters to > each student.) And some things can only be learned through first-hand > experience. I just wish the enthusiasm for active learning methods was > tempered by an awareness of the constraints and dependence they can > impose on students. > > Jane Shevtsov > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Sarah Berke wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I want to briefly respond to David Lawrence's comment from several >> days > ago, >> about evaluation scores declining when he switched to active >> learning. > This >> comment probably hit home for anyone who has tried active learning: >> >>>>>> I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to "active >>>>>> learning." ...It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to >>>>>> >>>>>> ask >> questions >>>>>> relevant to the material we discussed in class. I had students >>>>>> complain they didn't learn anything from me >> >> For anyone who has ever been in this boat, you are not alone--this is >> a >> common phenomenon when introducing active learning methods to a >> student > body >> that is accustomed to traditional lecture-based methods. Based on my >> own >> experiences, and those of various colleagues, I would guess that most >> instructors got similar comments when they first switched over from >> lecturing. I am fairly new to active learning myself, but I've >> talked > with >> colleagues who have been doing it for years, and everyone says that >> it >> really does get better (particularly if many faculty in the >> department >> all >> start using it). I think comments like "I didn't learn anything" >> stem > from >> problems with metacognition. How do you know when you've learned >> something? Memorizing 30 vocabulary words is a concrete achievement, >> you >> can point and say "There, I learned these words". But interpreting >> data, > or >> designing an experiment, or predicting the outcome of a perturbation >> to a >> system are all rather amorphous--there's no one thing to point to and >> say >> "I've learned this". That can throw students for a loop. >> Furthermore, > the >> level of energy and preparation required to participate in a >> learner-centered classroom can push students out of their comfort >> zones, >> particularly if they are accustomed to the ease of showing up and >> taking >> notes through a lecture. I am not trying to dismiss your student's >> comments, I'm just pointing out that some negative comments might >> have > more >> to do with feeling uncomfortable in a new situation than with >> learning >> science per se. >> >> Happily, none of these issues are insurmountable. The trick is to >> help >> students be aware of their own progress, and to bring them on board >> with > the >> goals of a learner-centered classroom. That is easier said than >> done, and >> it might take several years of trying before you land on the best way >> to >> accomplish that for your particular student body (but then, most new > classes >> take several years before you're happy with them, right?). >> >> Most importantly, none of these issues mean that your students were > actually >> not learning. You know what your students accomplished based on >> their >> exams, papers, and class participation. You probably know that they >> actually learned a lot, far more than they may have realized at the >> time. >> >> If you are convinced that active learning is better for students (and > there >> are good data to support that), then keep on truckin'. And pat >> yourself > on >> the back--changing the way you teach is a challenge, and your >> willingness > to >> try says more about you as an instructor than any given crop of >> evaluations. Finally, if you have any colleagues who are also trying > active >> learning, get together regularly and compare notes. It will help a >> lot. >> >> Best wishes, >> Sarah >> _________________________________ >> Sarah K Berke >> Postdoctoral Researcher >> Department of the Geophysical Sciences >> University of Chicago >> 5734 S. Ellis Ave >> Chicago, IL 60637 >> > > > > -- > ------------- > Jane Shevtsov > Ecology Ph.D. candidate, University of Georgia > co-founder, Check out my blog, Perceiving Wholes > > "The whole person must have both the humility to nurture the > Earth and the pride to go to Mars." --Wyn Wachhorst, The Dream > of Spaceflight
