David Thornburg at thornbugthoughts recentely brought up some good points about the Flipped Classroom movement (http://thornburgthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/06/10/flipping-the-flipped-classroom/) I agree that there are issues and that one size or technology does not fit all, but I think we need to look beyond the tool to how it is used by people in education. Here is my response to David:
I believe the goal is not to do traditional homework in
class, but to move it beyond recall towards sustained projects with inquiry and
higher order thinking. Yes, the videos can be boring, but no more so than a
lecture. But, if you want them to be more interesting, keep them short and link in
other sources including primary sources, credible websites and even other
videos. The videos are used to present the basic background information and then
class time can be used in exactly the ways you suggest.
The real problem to me
seems to be that people think that technology will solve the problems, it
won't. What can solve problems is using technology (or a technique) in creative
ways by educators (people) to engage students by enlisting them as knowledge
creators (not as vessels to be filled) and thereby making learning relevant to
the world today. Of course as you point out, a flaw in this logic is the
assumption that students will watch what they won't read. If there is no
accountability for not watching, then they won’t. Basically, it isn't the tool,
it is how it is used and as Jon Bergmann (who helped start the flipped
classroom concept) notes, it might not work for all classes or grade levels.
See: http://flipped-learning.com/?p=577
Rowen and Bigum (2012) would call for us to be "sportively skeptical"of new technology ideas (p. 222).
See:
Rowen,
L., & Bigum, C. (Eds.), (2012). Transformative
approaches to new technology and student diversity in futures oriented
classrooms: Future proofing education. Dordrecht, Germany: Springer.
No comments:
Post a Comment