It's good to talk especially in lectures!final2

Anna K. Wood

It's Good to Talk - Especially in Lectures!

● Lectures

Traditional:

‘Passive’, Monologic, Didactic, Teacher Centred

Purpose: content delivery.

Image from teddy-rised on Flickr

● Lectures

Reformed:

‘Active’, Engagement, Student Centred

Purpose:

Subject mastery.

Active Learning ≡ Interactive Engagement

……….heads-on (always) and hands-on (usually) activitieswhich yield immediate feedback through discussion with

peers and/or instructors...

Socio-cultural perspective

R. Hake, Am. J. Phys. 66(1), 1998

Talk in Lectures - 3 Perspectives:

1. Quantitative analysis of talk: (Framework for Interactive Learning in Lectures).

2. Lecturer-Student interactions.

3. Peer-discussions.

●

Acknowledgements

Judy Hardy, Ross Galloway(Edinburgh Physics Education Research Group (EdPER))

Christine Sinclair(Moray House)

● Context

● 1st year Physics Lectures

● 200-300 students (80:20 Male:Female)

● ‘Flipped’ Approach• Pre-readings and Quiz

● Active Learning Approach (Peer Instruction)

Peer-Instruction●

Part 1: Quantitative analysis of talk

Research Questions: 1. What types of interactions take place?2. To what extent is each used in a lecture?

Part 1: Quantitative Analysis

●Method Data Collection: Lecture Capture Videos.16 lectures, 8 from each course (1A and 1B). CodingConstructivist grounded theory approach.Activities coded on a continuous (per second) basis.


Type of Activity

Lecturer talking, students listening

Lecturer question, student answer

Student question, lecturer answer

Student silent thinking

Student-student discussion

Feedback on PI voting, students listening

Inter-rater Reliability = 91%

Cohen’s kappa = 0.74

Framework for Interactive Learning in Lectures (FILL)


Physics 1A Physics 1B


Average Time on Lecturer Talking = 55%

● Quantitative Conclusions●

● FILL framework useful for characterising interactions in lectures.

● 55% of time is spent on non-interactive (passive) activities.


Part 2: Lecturer-Student interactions

Part 2: Lecturer-StudentInteractions

Research Questions

1) What are the purposes of lecturer-student dialogue?

2) What is the nature of the dialogue? (e.g. dialogic vs authoritative)

● Peer-Instruction

●

Example 1

Lecturer:

Ok, so what did you say, so here’s what we said (shows graph), that’s an 80% win for option B and roughly equal for A and C as well there. So option B, 7 Joules , 7 Joules work done during that expansion.


● Triadic Dialogue (IRF):

Initiation (I) TeacherResponse (R) StudentFeedback (F) Teacher


Sinclair, J. & Coulthard, M. (1975)

● Triadic Dialogue (IRF):

Initiation (I) TeacherPose Clicker QResponse (R) StudentStudent’s VoteFeedback (F) TeacherLecturer shows graph


Peer-Instruction●

Type of Activity Interactivity TypeLecturer talking, students listening Non-Interactive

Lecturer question, student answer Vicarious Interactive

Student question, lecturer answer Vicarious Interactive

Student silent thinking Interactive

Student-student discussion Interactive

Feedback on PI voting, students listening Interactive


● Dialogic or Authoritative?

Dialogic Interaction:

More than one voice is heard and there is an exploration or ‘interanimation’ (Bahktin 1935) of ideas.

Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning Making In Secondary Science Classrooms.


Example 1 (continued)

Lecturer: Why is it 7 Joules, how did you

calculate that?

Student: area under the graph …..

Lecturer: yep,


● Example 2

Lecturer:

Why might someone say option C? What led you to think there is no heat transferred in this situation?


● Example 2

Lecturer:Why might someone say option C? What led you to think there is no heat transferred in this situation?

Lecturer:

Anyone disagree with that, anyone agree with it? ….What do you think?


● Dialogic or Authoritative?

‘Ideologically Dialogic’

Equal social relationships, intellectual openness and opportunities for creative thought. But can be discursively monologic.

E.g. Re-voicing, Higher order follow-up questions

O’Connor, C., & Michaels, S. (2007). When Is Dialogue “Dialogic”? Human Development, 50(5), 275–285.


● Types of Lecturer-Student Interaction

1. Feedback

2. Involving Students in Sense Making (Peer-Instruction)

3. Guided Expert Thinking/Problem Solving

4. Wonderment Questions


● Lecturer-Student Conclusions4 purposes of dialogue in large lectures

classes identified

Dialogue can be technology mediated

Interactions predominantly ‘authoritative’ …..

….but overall these are ‘ideologically dialogic’


Part 3: Peer-discussions.

Part 3: Peer-Discussions

●


Smart Pens Electronic Voting System

Data Collection

Resources Model


Hammer, D. 1996a. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97–127.Redish, E. F. 2004. Research on Physics Education, vol.156.

Resource Activation


Student 1: The work done on the gas, that means the work done by the gas is negative

Student 2: I think you’re probably right, oh, yeah, I’m a fool.Yep

Resource Activation


Activation through knowledge elements

Activation through linkages between resources

Activation through control structures (epistemic games)

Types of Activation


Student 1: The work done on the gas, that means the work done by the gas is negative

Student 2: I think you’re probably right, oh, yeah, I’m a fool.Yep

Activation through knowledge elements


Activation through links


The Big Bang Theory, Season 1 Episode 2 The Big Bran Hypothesis.



The Big Bang Theory, Season 1 Episode 2 The Big Bran Hypothesis.



Student 1:

Sin 30 is a half, I remember that from the Big Bang Theory when they were trying to push it up the stairs

Student 2: oh yeah it was about half the work because it was 30 degrees

●

‘An activation of a pattern of resources that can be associated with a collection of resources’From: J. Tuminaro and E. F. Redish, Elements of a cognitive model of physics problem solving: Epistemic games, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 020101 (2007).

Epistemic Games


http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020101



● Epistemic Games(Recursive Plug and Chug)


● Epistemic Games


●

Student 1: yep it is A!Student 2: It is A!Student 3: yep yep yep yep yep got it!

Epistemic Games (2)(Pictorial Analysis)


Course Design


Peer-Discussion Conclusions

● Peer discussions help students to:• Activate knowledge connections• Make links to other ideas• Try different approaches to problem solving

● Student-student discussions are more than just ‘one student teaches another’

Course Design


Final ThoughtsStudying the way talk is used in active learning lectures:

Highlights the importance of lecturer talk used in combination with student-centred activities

Shows the variation in lecturer-student interactions (and the challenges of generating productive talk)

Gives insights into the thinking processes during peer-discussion

● For more details:●

E-mail: [email protected]: @annakwood

References:

1. Wood et al. ‘Characterizing interactive engagement activities in a flipped introductory physics class’ Phys. Rev. Phys.Educ. Res. 12, 010140 (2016)

2. Wood et al. ‘Analyzing learning during Peer Instruction dialogues: A resource activation framework’ Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research 10.2 (2014): 020107.

3. Wood et al. ‘Teacher-Student Discourse in Active Learning Lectures: A Case Study from Undergraduate Physics’ Submitted

mailto:[email protected]


●

Theoretical Approach

R. Hake, Am. J. Phys. 66(1), 1998