NameSchoolDepartment

JUST IN TIME TEACHINGA 21ST CENTURY TEACHING TECHNIQUE@ ELCC, APRIL 2014

DR. JEFF LOATSDEPARTMENT OF PHYSICSMSU DENVER

THE EVIDENCE STANDARD2

Teachers can feel bombarded…

I strive to be a scholarly teacher …

• Apply the rigor we bring to the discipline of physics to the discipline of teaching.

• Choose teaching methods that are strongly informed by the best empirical evidence available.

Contrast teaching your subject with treating diabetes

In your teaching do you have a method for holding students accountable for preparing for class?

A)I don’t, but I ask/threaten really well.

B)I use a paper method (quiz, journal, others?)

C)I use a digital method (clickers, others?)

D)I use Just in Time Teaching.E) I have some other method.

3

24%49%11%4%

13%(others)

OVERVIEW4

1. Motivation for change

2. Basics of Just in Time Teaching

3. Quick example

4. Evidence for effectiveness

5. Summaries

5PHYSICS EDUCATION REVOLUTIONEric Mazur, Physicist at Harvard:

6“ALL SIMILARLY (IN)EFFECTIVE…”

7

University of Washington

University of Colorado

University of Illinois

at Urbana-Champaign

FEEDBACK THAT WORKS8

“Improvement of performance is actually a function of two perceptual processes. The individual’s perception of the standards of performance, and her/his perception of his/her own performance.” The Feedback Fallacy – Steve Falkenberg (via Linda Nilson)

TECHNIQUE & TECHNOLOGY9

Technique:Just in Time Teaching

Technology:Online question & response tools

Learner

Teacher

JUST IN TIME TEACHING10

Online pre-class assignments (“WarmUps”)

First half - Students

• Conceptual questions, answered in sentences

• Graded on thoughtful effort

Second half - Instructor

• Responses are read “just in time”

• Instructor modifies that day’s plan accordingly.

• Aggregate and individual (anonymous) responses are displayed in class.

Consider a typical day in your class. What fraction of students did their preparatory work before coming to class?

A) 0% - 20%

B) 20% - 40%

C) 40% - 60%

D)60% - 80%

E) 80% - 100%

11

27%33%20%14%6%

~200 others

Students have developed a robot dog and a robot cat, both of which can run at 8 mph and walk at 4 mph.

A the end of the term, there is a race!

The robot cat must run for half of its racing time, then walk.

The robot dog must run for half the race distance, then walk.

A) The cat wins B) The dog wins C) They tie

12

WARM-UP: ROBODOG VS. ROBOCATPredict which one will win the race, and explain why you think so.

~38% → Robocat!

~19% → Robodog!

~19% → They tie!

~12% → Can’t tell!

~12% → Good math

~4% → Bad math

~27% → Good reasoning

~35% → Bad reasoning

~19% → Invalid arguments

WARM-UP: ROBODOG VS. ROBOCAT“Cats rule - dogs drool!”

“Robot dog. Because dogs naturally walk more thaan cats. ”

“The cat--it won the flip of the coin.”

“The cat.... To be honest, I used the resources I have and asked my colleague who is a physics major.”

WARM-UP: ROBODOG VS. ROBOCAT“The robot cat will win. My reasoning for this is:

-the dog will run for half the distance, but then walk the rest, which means he will be walking the same amount of distance but that also means that will take him longer to do the last half of the race.

-the cat will run, no matter what, half the time, so her walking time is definitely less than the dogs walking time”

WARMUP QUESTIONS16

• Every-day language• Occasional simple comprehension

question• Mostly higher level questions (a la

Bloom)• Perhaps any question is better than

noneConnections to evidence:–Pre-class work reduces working

memory load during class.–Multimodal practice (not learning

styles):JiTT brings reading, writing and discussion as modes of practice.

METACOGNITION17

Two questions end every WarmUp:

“What aspect of the material did you find the most difficult or interesting.”

“How much time did you spend on the pre-class work for tomorrow?”

Connections to evidence:

–Forced practice at metacognition: Students regularly evaluate their own interaction with the material.

THE FEEDBACK LOOP18

Student responses:

• Graded on thoughtful effort

• Sampled and categorized for display

• Quoted anonymously

Closing the loop:

• Respond to some students digitally

• Class time shifts to active engagement.

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK19

Faulkenberg’s criteria for feedback:

• Feedback doesn’t work if students don’t correctly perceive the performance standards.

• Feedback doesn’t work if students cannot correctly evaluate their own performance.

JiTT feedback loop:

Clarify standards in low-stakes situations.

Allows students to judge whether they have correctly evaluated their own performance.

JUST IN TIME TEACHING

A different student role:• Actively prepare for class

(not just reading/watching)• Actively engage in class• Compare your progress & plan accordingly

A different instructor role:• Actively prepare for class with you

(not just going over last year’s notes )• Modify class accordingly• Create interactive engagement

opportunities

Learner

Teacher

20

21

MAZUR AFTER 1 YEAR

22

ELSEWHERE?

STUDIED EFFECTIVENESS23

Used at hundreds of institutions

Dozens of studies/articles, in many disciplines:Bio, Art Hist., Econ., Math, Psych., Chem., etc.

– Increase in content knowledge

– Improved student preparation for class

– Improved use of out-of-class time

– Increased attendance & engagement in class

– Improvement in affective measures

Which do you think students say is most impacted by their participation in JiTT WarmUps?

A) Their preparation for class

B) Their engagement during class

C) Their overall learning

24

STUDENT FEEDBACK ON JITT315 students in 7 classes over 4 terms (roughly ±6%)

The WarmUps have…Agreed or Strongly Agreed

…helped me to be more prepared for class than I would otherwise be.

70%

…helped me to be more engaged in class than I would otherwise be. 

80%

…helped me to learn the material better than I otherwise would

64%

…been worth the time they required to complete 57%

WHAT TOOLS TO USE?26

The crucial part:

Daily reading, grading & using responses• Automatic full credit for any

response• View all responses to a question

together• Grade responses on the same page

with minimal clicks

Wishlist:

Easy (quick!) individual feedback

WHAT TOOLS TO USE?27

• LMS (Blackboard, D2L, Moodle, etc.)Ready to use, tools range from ok to awful

• Free service from JiTTDL.org.Designed just for JiTT, but feels like a ~5 year old website (for good reason)

• Students email responsesEasy! Usually overwhelming and awful

• Blogging tools (WordPress)?

WHAT MIGHT STOP YOU?28

In terms of the technique:Time, coverage, not doing your part, pushback…

In terms of the technology:Learning curve, tech. failures, perfectionism…

In any reform of your teaching:Reinventing, no support, too much at once…

MY SUMMARY29

JiTT may be among the easiest research-based instructional strategies that you can consistently integrate into your teaching.

From an evidence-based perspective, JiTT addresses often-neglected areas.

Be prepared to find that students know less than we might hope. (Perhaps freeing?)

YOUR SUMMARY30

For yourself… or to share?

What one “nugget” do most want remember to use yourself or to share with faculty at your institution?

Contact Jeff: Jeff.Loats@gmail.comSlides: www.slideshare.net/JeffLoats

I love talking and working with faculty, don’t hesitate to get in touch.

JITT REFERENCES & RESOURCES

31

Simkins, Scott and Maier, Mark (Eds.) (2010) Just in Time Teaching: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy, Stylus Publishing.

Gregor M. Novak, Andrew Gavrini, Wolfgang Christian, Evelyn Patterson (1999) Just-in-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River NJ.

K. A. Marrs, and G. Novak. (2004). Just-in-Time Teaching in Biology: Creating an Active Learner Classroom Using the Internet. Cell Biology Education, v. 3, p. 49-61.

Jay R. Howard (2004). Just-in-Time Teaching in Sociology or How I Convinced My Students to Actually Read the Assignment.  Teaching Sociology, Vol. 32 (No. 4 ). pp. 385-390. Published by: American Sociological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3649666

S. Linneman, T. Plake (2006). Searching for the Difference: A Controlled Test of Just-in-Time Teaching for Large-Enrollment Introductory Geology Courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, Vol. 54 (No. 1)Stable URL:http://www.nagt.org/nagt/jge/abstracts/jan06.html#v54p18