Communication pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
ConfChem Conference on Flipped Classroom: Time-Saving Resources Aligned with Cognitive Science To Help Instructors JudithAnn R. Hartman,† Donald J. Dahm,‡,∥ and Eric A. Nelson*,§,∥ †
Department of Chemistry, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland 21402, United States Department of Chemistry, Rowan University, Glassboro, New Jersey 08028, United States § Fairfax County Public Schools, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, United States ‡
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 27, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): July 21, 2015 | doi: 10.1021/ed5009156
S Supporting Information *
ABSTRACT: Studies in cognitive science have verified that working memory (where the brain solves problems) can manipulate nearly all elements of knowledge that can be recalled automatically from long-term memory, but only a few elements that have not previously been well memorized. Research in reading comprehension has found that “lecture notes with clicker questions” can move a portion of lecture content to homework. By applying these findings to the design of homework-tutorials for students, under the right conditions, we found that time for active learning during lecture increased and student achievement measurably improved. Factors that have affected the outcome of our experiments are discussed. This communication summarizes one of the invited papers to the ConfChem online conference Flipped Classroom, held from May 9 to June 12, 2014 and hosted by the ACS DivCHED Committee on Computers in Chemical Education (CCCE). KEYWORDS: General Public, High School/Introductory Chemistry, First-Year Undergraduate/General, Curriculum, Problem Solving/Decision Making, Learning Theories
C
an more time be created during class for demonstrations, discussions, and challenging problem solving? In this communication, we report on experiments to increase time for instructor-guided active learning without having to videotape lectures. For sections of preparatory, GOB, engineering, and general chemistry, “lecture-note tutorials” were written that “flip” delivery of portions of lecture content to study time. To be instructionally effective as homework, the tutorials were designed to align with findings of recent cognitive research.
If memorized elements are repeatedly processed with other elements during problem solving in WM, their associations are moved into LTM where they organize conceptual frameworks (schema). Experts add new elements and linkages to their domain schema easily, but during introductory courses when frameworks are less well organized, LTM is resistant to change. To efficiently develop automaticity during initial study, strategies recommended by cognitive research include the following: 1. Presenting new content in small bundles, with frequent “clicker questions” to encourage thought about meaning3,4 2. “Spaced overlearning”: Self-quizzing, repeated over several days, to achieve fluent recall of new elements3,4 3. “Interleaved practice”: Applying new and previously learned facts and procedures in a variety of contexts4 4. Active learning: Demonstrations, discussions, and challenging problems that tag new elements with visual, auditory, and semantic links and context1−4 By supplying and/or reinforcing steps 1−3 during homework, lecture tutorials can create additional time in class for activities that build conceptual frameworks. Further discussion of recent cognitive research can be found in this article’s Supporting Information and in a previous
■
MEMORIZATION AND WORKING MEMORY In the cognitive science model for reasoning, problems are solved by the brain’s processing of small elements of knowledge (facts and procedures) in “working memory” (WM). Elements can enter WM from the senses (such as by listening or reading) or from “long-term memory” (LTM) where with effort elements can be stored. Recent research has determined that WM can hold and manipulate all elements that can be recalled quickly and automatically from LTM, but only about three−five small elements that have not been well memorized.1,2 In “chemistry for science majors”, a focus is learning to solve “well-structured” problems, including calculations that are foundational for work in the sciences. When solving such problems, to avoid the bottleneck imposed by working memory, cognitive experts emphasize that students must memorize fundamental facts and problem-solving procedures “to automaticity”: To achieve fast and accurate recall.1−3 © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
A
DOI: 10.1021/ed5009156 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Communication
publication.5 Those articles list multiple reviews of recent cognitive research written for instructors that include extensive citation of primary sources.
This paper was discussed from May 9 to May 15 during the spring 2014 ConfChem online conference, Flipped Classroom, hosted by the ACS DivCHED Committee on Computers in Chemical Education (CCCE).6
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on August 27, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date (Web): July 21, 2015 | doi: 10.1021/ed5009156
■
■
TUTORIALS WITH CLICKER QUESTIONS During initial encounters with scientific content in reading or lecture, research has found that comprehension improves if students are asked to solve “clicker questions” with feedback provided.3,4 Our experiments began in 2007 at Rowan University with the assignment of “lecture notes with clicker questions, practice problems, and worked-out answers” as homework in Engineering Chemistry (links to samples are listed in the Supporting Information). After revision, in the second year of tutorial use, students scored at the 63rd percentile on the two-semester ACS General Chemistry Examination after completing the one standard semester allotted for the course. In addition, lab time taken for lecture in previous years was able to be restored. Since then, use of the tutorials to gain time for active learning has expanded to sections of preparatory, GOB, and general chemistry. “Random samples” of students have often not been available due to scheduling constraints, but anecdotal gains in student achievement have been observed from a combination of tutorials, active in-class learning, and policies that encourage homework completion.
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
S Supporting Information *
The ConfChem paper and discussion, with links to sample tutorials posted online, challenging activities for use during class time, and additional suggestions for readings in cognitive science. This material is available via the Internet at http:// pubs.acs.org.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. Notes
The authors declare the following competing financial interest(s): The authors declare the following competing financial interests: Donald Dahm and Eric Nelson have coauthored textbooks in chemistry. ∥ Retired
■
■
REFERENCES
(1) Clark, R.; Sweller, J.; Kirschner, P. Putting Students on the Path to Learning: The Case for Fully Guided Instruction. Am. Educator 2012, Spring, 6−11. (2) Geary, D. C.; Boykin, A. W.; Embretson, S.; Reyna, V.; Siegler, R.; Berch, D. B.; Graban, J. The Report of the Task Group on Learning Processes; U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC, 2008; pp 4-2−4-10. http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/ report/learning-processes.pdf (accessed Apr 2015). This report contributed to a subsequent work: National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel; U.S. Department of Education: Washington, DC, 2008; http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf (accessed Apr 2015). (3) Willingham, D. Why Don’t Students Like School? A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions about How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom; Wiley: New York, 2009; pp 41−65. (4) Brown, P.; Roediger, H.; McDaniel, M. Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 2014; pp 23−66. (5) Hartman, J. R.; Nelson, E. A. “Do We Need To Memorize That?” Or Cognitive Science for Chemists. Found. Chem. 2015, 1−12. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10698-015-9226-z (accessed Apr 2015). (6) American Chemical Society Division of Chemical Education Committee on Computers in Chemical Education. 2014 Spring ConfChem: Flipped Classroom. http://confchem.ccce.divched.org/ 2014SpringConfChem (accessed Apr 2015).
HOMEWORK COMPLETION It can be difficult “in real life” to get students to complete the homework before lecture needed for active learning during lecture. Although we have not completely solved this problem, we have found the following to be effective in a variety of courses: 1. Ask students to work on practice problems in a coursededicated “spiral notebook,” so that in case of academic difficulty, homework can be assessed. 2. Encourage “distributed practice” (working on homework several times a week) using frequent short quizzes with questions similar to those in the tutorials. 3. Explain that as part of study, fundamentals must be thoroughly memorized. Encourage efforts to automate recall via short “closed notes” quizzes (with the possible exception of a “formula sheet” for a comprehensive exam). 4. In strong classes, quiz on the tutorials, then go directly to higher-level topics. In less-well-prepared classes, tutorials may need to reinforce lecture. 5. Move beyond the tutorials using questions solved in class that are challenging but can be done with stepwise guidance. 6. Experiment with instructional designs for differing student populations. Student populations with sizable nonacademic responsibilities may need a higher percentage of content presented during lecture. For high school students who may have limited access to time and space for quiet study at home, offer space if possible for quiet tutorial work after school. Overall, a summary of our recommendations would be as follows: Embrace the gift of science’s improved understanding of how the brain works and how students learn. When we align our instruction with science, we help our students learn chemistry. B
DOI: 10.1021/ed5009156 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
