Written by Allen Labitzky
“What is the best way to teach?” It is a question teachers think about frequently. Though lecture remains an effective way to give students information (Berrett, 2012; Clayton, Blumberg & Auld, 2010; Schwerdt & Wuppermann, 2010; Struyven, Dochy & Janssens, 2010), there are limitations (Ernst, 2008; Welker & Berardino, 2005), including problems with the pace of a class (Goodwin & Miller, 2013) and an inability to accommodate different learning styles (Lage & Platt, 2000). In contrast, online classes offer students flexibility, convenience, and differentiated learning strategies (Clayton, Blumberg & Auld, 2010) but lack of face-to-face interaction, fluidity, and immediate feedback (Daymont, et al., 2011, Ernst, 2008). As are result, most students still prefer lecture (Tawil, et al., 2012).
Can we use the best of both approaches? Various hybrid approaches have been used at universities for decades (Berrett, 2012; Kaynar & Sumerli, 2010; Welker & Berardino, 2005), but only recently has hybridized instruction made its way to high school and middle school classrooms. One method, known as the flipped classroom, gained attention when Bergmann and Sams used web recordings of lectures and demonstrations (Flipped Learning Network, 2013) as their primary at-home learning component. In the flipped classroom, passive, in-class learning is replaced with active student-led investigations and collaborative problem solving (Berrett, 2012; Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013). The key is not so much the on-line components the students watch at home, but the extra time students devote to hands-on learning (Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013), the increased peer interaction (Flipped Learning Network, 2013), and improved one-on-one teacher feedback (Berrett, 2012; Goodwin & Miller, 2013) in the classroom. Lage and Platt (2000) state, “The Internet provides students with an excellent complement, not substitute, to their in-class efforts. The use of the web in providing core content allows us to use experiments, group work, and other highly interactive in-class pedagogies without sacrificing course content.”
Bergmann and Sams (Flipped Learning Network, 2013) report that once they flipped their classrooms, their students interacted more in class. Brunsell and Horejsi (2013) cite that in traditional classrooms only about two-thirds of students felt there was enough classroom time to get the help they needed from their teacher. Once the classroom was flipped, 96% of the students reported they received the in-class help they needed. A case study of one school (Clintondale High School, 2013) reports that flipping “reduced the failure rate by 33% in English Language Arts, 31% in Mathematics, 22% in Science and 19% in Social Studies in just one semester.” Further research at Clintondale (Flummerfelt and Green, 2013) confirms there are substantial increases in differentiated learning compared to traditional classrooms. Another case study at ByronHigh School reports that “math mastery jumped from 29.9% in 2006 to 73.8% in 2011” once classrooms were flipped (Fulton, 2012; Flipped Learning Network, 2013). While these case studies suggest that flipped classrooms positively impact student learning (Hamden, et al., 2013), there is “no scientific research base to indicate exactly how well flipped classrooms work” (Goodwin & Miller, 2013).
I first read about flipped classrooms in the March 2013 issue of Educational Leadership. I am no expert, but I am convinced that the flipped classroom approach requires a response from our Lutheran schools. First, MLC should continue to encourage and train teachers on how to best utilize on-line resources. Because the flipped classroom is still managed by the teacher, Lutheran teachers can embrace what technology offers without compromising our Christ-centered focus. Second, with its growing graduate program, MLC could be at the forefront of developing a body of research that thoroughly investigates flipped classrooms. MLC and our Lutheran schools could gather extensive data and conduct needed scientific investigation of flipped classrooms. Finally, while sites like The Flipped Learning Network (2013) and Kahn Academy (Gorman, 2013) host numerous lessons, they lack materials that align with the Bible. Our Lutheran schools need not replicate the materials already available, but could collaboratively create our own library of resources that teach the Scriptures and all subjects from a Christ-centered perspective. As flipping classrooms catches on, MLC could be the global resource for teachers and home-school parents wanting on-line materials that are presented from a Christian worldview.
The flipped classroom idea makes this an exciting time for our Lutheran schools, not just because we can improve learning, but because it gives us the opportunity to proclaim the gospel to an audience we may have never otherwise reached.
Allen Labitzky is principal at King of Grace Lutheran School in Golden Valley, Minnesota. He is a graduate of Wisconsin Lutheran College and earned his master’s degree from Marquette University. He is working toward a second master’s degree from MLC with a leadership emphasis.
References:
Berrett, D. (2012). How ‘Flipping’ the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture. Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(25).
Brunsell, E. & Horejsi, M. (2013). Science 2.0: A Flipped Classroom in Action. Science Teacher, 80(2), p. 8-8.
Clayton, K., Blumberg, F., & Auld, D. P. (2010). The Relationship Between Motivation, Learning Strategies, and Choice of Environment whether Traditional or Including an On-line Component. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 349-364.
ClintondaleHigh School (2013). About ClintondaleHigh School, Clintondale High School website, http://www.flippedhighschool.com/
Daymont, T., Blau, G. & Campbell, D. (2011). Deciding Between Traditional and Online Formats: Exploring the Role of Learning Advantages, Flexibility, and Compensatory Adaptation. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 12(2), 156-175.
Ernst, J. V. (2008). A Comparison of Traditional and Hybrid Online Instructional Presentation in Communication Technology. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 40-49.
Flipped Learning Network (2013) www.flippedlearning.org.
Flumerfelt, S., & Green, G. (2013). Using Lean in the Flipped Classroom for At Risk Students. Educational Technology & Society, 16 (1), 356–366.
Fulton, K. (2012). The Flipped Classroom: Transforming Education at ByronHigh School. T.H.E. Journal, 39(3), 18-20.
Goodwin, B. & Miller, K. (2013). Evidence on Flipped Classrooms is Still Coming In. Educational Leadership, 70(6), 78-80.
Gorman, M. (2012). Flipping The Classroom… A Goldmine of Research and Resources To Keep You On Your Feet. http://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/
Gorman, M. (2013). E-Curriculum…7 Key Tools Uncovering a Goldmine of E-Resources…The Digital Curriculum Part Three. http://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com/
Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013). A Review of Flipped Learning, GeorgeMasonUniversity.
Kaynar, B. H. & Sumerli, G. (2010). A Meta-Analysis of Comparison Between Traditional and Web-Based Instruction. Ekev Academic Review, 14, 153-164.
Lage, M. J. & Platt, G. (2000). The Internet and the Inverted Classroom. Journal of Economic Education. 31(1), 11.
Lage, M. J., Platt, G., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment. Journal of Economic Education. 31(1), p. 30-43.
Schwerdt, G. & Wuppermann, A. C. (2010). Is traditional teaching really all that bad? A within-student between-subject approach. Economics of Education Review, 30(2), 365-379.
Struyven, K., Dochy, F. & Janssens, S. (2010). ‘Teach as You Preach’: The Effects of Student-centered Versus Lecture-based Teaching on Student Teachers’ approaches to Teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 43-64.
Tawil, N. M., Ismail, N. A., Asshaari, I., Osman, H., Nopiah, Z. M. & Zaharim, A. (2012). Learning Process in Mathematics and Statistics Courses towards Engineering Students: E-Learning or Traditional Method. Asian Social Science, 8 (16), 128-133.
Welker, J. & Berardino, L. (2005). Blended Learning: Understanding the Middle Ground Between Traditional Classroom and Fully Online Instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(1), 33-55.
The “Flipped” classroom can be defined in different ways, especially when considering the level of education. While teaching 6th grade, I had the opportunity to teach a unit on “reciprocal learning”. Many students showed more initiative and participated much more in both homework and during class discussions. However, I do recognize the comment that the objectives, content, and assessment was very teacher driven.
This summer I took the class “Issues in Education” at MLC and did a further in-depth study on education turning more towards student centered rather than curriculum driven. For a year and a half I had the wonderful opportunity out of college to teach in a Reggio Emilia inspired preschool which is strictly a child interest driven curriculum. It really took a long time to see the shift in teaching strategies and the effect it had on children’s long term cognitive retention. Now I am in a preschool in which the current lead teacher is back to the curriculum driven content. It’s so easy to go back into that rut because that’s how we were taught to teach. However, when considering the children, the lack of interest, management issues, and lack of attention or retention, I feel myself being tugged back to the student-centered learning.
This summer I also did a 3 month internship at a Montessori school in which curriculum is ultimately driven by the interests of each student. Very interesting to see first hand.
“guided-discovery, hands-on learning, student centered” It really is a paradigm shift in education that I am thinking will take decades to implement.
Phil raised the question of “the entire pedagogical sequence of the flipped classroom – that is, that students should read/listen independently before they do and experience.” I would note that not everyone flips a classroom exactly in the same way or the same sequence. As a personal example, for a class I’m teaching (at the college level) right now, I have sometimes been doing brief video commentaries and/or blog postings AFTER a classroom discovery session — to sum up, review, reinforce things that came out of the in-class discussion session which we held. Each teacher will be looking for strategies that maximize learning for his particular students in his particular class.
David Sellnow, Martin Luther College
But at it’s base, the flipped classroom is didactic, lecture-based, homework. Instead of listening to me (or someone else) talk to them in the classroom, students listen to me (or someone else) talk to them at home. Setting aside the argument for/against homework for the moment, flipped classrooms aren’t successful because they are flipped – it’s because teachers finally allow time for the student-centered constructivism of Dewey and the interactive, social learning of Bandura and Vygotsky to take place.
Teachers will tout flipped classrooms as students taking control and responsibility for their own learning – but that we trick ourselves as educators if we believe that is actually what is taking place. I as the teacher choose the lectures they see, the concepts they should learn, the things they should do – it’s just that they learn those things at home. This is type of teaching and learning is still teacher centered, even though the location is different. Something like inquiry-based learning or project-based learning gets more to the strength of a flipped classroom than the flipped classroom does.
There is also at least one study that calls into question the entire pedagogical sequence of the flipped classroom – that is, that students should read/listen independently before they do and experience (you can find that study here: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/july/flipped-learning-model-071613.html)
I don’t mean to be divisive, but I would call into question the wisdom of allocating human and monetary resources of a church body with limited amount of both to pursuing production and implementation of a teaching strategy of questionable efficacy.
Also, I thought my word press account would include my last name. So people don’t think I’m trying to anonymously fire my thoughts out there, I’m Phil Eich, teacher in Bay City, MI.
Great discussion. Thank you for your contributions. You are right on when you note that a flipped classroom is a very teacher-centered approach. The teacher makes the decisions, provides the content, and determines the method of reinforcement.
Many teachers are frustrated by the lack of time they have to teach a lesson. They lack the time to give all students the kind of experiences that properly reinforce learning, make learning meaningful, and promote critical thinking. They forego such luxuries because they feel the need to use their limited lesson time to present content. After all, one can’t put the cart before the horse – one can’t think critically before on has something to think about (Willingham, 2009).
Flipping the classroom allows the teacher to use out of class time for low-level cognition involved with content acquisition and use class time for higher-level cognition activities and skills practice. I get the appeal of it, and for a teacher who prefers a teacher-centered model of instruction, it makes a lot of sense.
Thanks John.
There is an appeal to older teachers like myself who were trained in the early 1980s in teacher education programs where content was a cornerstone. I also want to make positive pedagogical changes and the ideas involved in flipped classrooms have some merit in moving in the right direction.
My question in this idea of moving from teacher centered to student centered learning is two fold. One, are students ready cognitively from taking ownership of their own learning in middle to early high school. Anecdotal evidence would suggest in my classroom that perhaps as many as 60-75% are not ready. Secondly, even if students are ready, has their former learning patterns been so tainted by classroom experience K-8, that they are no able to function well in a flipped classroom?
Unless MLC and other colleges of education give training on how to implement flipped classrooms and MORE importantly on how to move from teacher centered to student centered teaching, many of us old dogs are going to continue down the current road we were trained upon.
Lastly, I think it is really setting up a false dichotomy to say we must move from a teacher centered to student centered classroom learning environment. Let’s be honest here in our discussion by saying there are aspects that are teacher oriented and student oriented in the classroom. The two sides must collaborate and fulfill their roles in order for education to be successful.
God’s richest blessings on our conversation. These discussions really need to be starting points for face to face online discussions that are real time in the future.
Phil, I am not sure that I am “All in”, on flipped classes or schools. However, when you read and watch how flipping is done, benefits are immediately obvious. Allen never talked about Flipped Classes being student centered or about Project Based Learning. What he did state is evidence that they can improve learning and that there are many, many, many resources out there to read and watch so teachers can broaden their best pedagogical skills with another tool.
I’m not sure you need more monetary resources to do flipped teaching. Our teacher laptops have web cams built in. We did buy a nice, $130 microphone. Does it take time to write scrips and upload video of yourself? Sure. It takes teachers hours and hours to rewrite curriculum, find new resources, and develop new lessons each summer. It even takes hours and hours to run off worksheets in the summer, if you still do that.
What teachers need to do is evaluate the learners you have today in your classroom. They don’t stand and listen to sermons for three hours like Martin Luther’s congregation did in the 1600’s. They don’t even care to sit for 20 minutes and listen to a Pastor’s sermon. As teachers, we have to reach students where they are at–not teach them like we were taught. Worksheets measure how well a kid can Google a question. Tests measure how well a kid can regurgitate a teacher’s notes. Is that what teachers should measure? I want to measure thinking, analysis, and creativity.
Flipped education has it’s benefits. Flipped education has it’s negatives. But one thing I know. When I see students lectured to for 42 minutes a day, is there learning going on or is that blank look on their face boredom and despair? There ARE different ways to reach different learners in these digital times. Try this school (not an active website they teach from) http://www.flippedhighschool.com/ or this article http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/turning-education-upside-down/?_r=0 or this study http://www.editlib.org/p/48235.
Disruptive and maybe too early to tell the benefits, but don’t throw Flipped Classrooms out just because they are disruptive to the status quo.
Allen, well written article. I especially agree with many of your teacher training suggestions. However, being a 25 year veteran of WELS classrooms, I was never trained to teach an online class or a blended class but have learned to do so while watching others, trying it myself and reflecting on my practices to constantly improve. I wanted to do it because all the research I read touted the benefits. I have taught at least one class in this manner since a 5th grade computer applications class in 2010.
I would like to look at one statement in the article above:
“Finally, while sites like The Flipped Learning Network (2013) and Kahn Academy
(Gorman, 2013) host numerous lessons, they lack materials that align with the
Bible. Our Lutheran schools need not replicate the materials already available,
but could collaboratively create our own library of resources that teach the
Scriptures and all subjects from a Christ-centered perspective.”
Make my own resources? That takes a bunch of time–mostly impractical for our WELS “do everything” teachers. When I used to teach with textbooks, Lutheran schools never collaboratively created our own library of textbook resources. We taught everything captive to the work of Christ. I still do this in my blended/online classes. I use a YouTube video or a Duke university PDF for my students, but I, the teacher, am there for the Christ-centered perspective. It is I, the teacher, who educates the students to view everything first with a Christ-centered perspective while they work. It is I, the teacher, not the resource, that encourages and equips the students for lives of Christian perspective. Christian teachers can never be replaced in the classroom!!
Don’t be afraid to use resources not in a textbook. Don’t be afraid to use non-Lutheran, or non-Christian sources. Don’t be afraid to start with a few flipped or blended lessons between now and Christmas. Use the Bible as your guide, fall back on your training of law and Gospel and go out and make disciples of all nations in your classroom.