Teaching Workshop: More Doing is Better
I had the pleasure of attending a teaching workshop put on by the Graduate College at the University of Arizona. It featured five of the top teaching faculty that we have here on campus (Paul Blowers, Albrecht Classen, Lisa Elfring, John Pollard, and Edward Prather). It seems pretty clear based on their presentations/demos in the workshop that they have earned the distinction of being referred to as “master” teachers.
The workshop focused on ways to increase interactivity in the classroom with both low tech and high(er) tech methods. It was a bit of an informal session, that included (of course) segments of lecturing about active learning and educational research, demonstrations of group activities, sharing ideas to improve student engagement, and more general teaching tips. Here are just a few of the things that were highlighted:
Think/Pair/Share
A simple and powerful way to get students to wrangle with an idea is to ask them to talk about it with their fellow classmates. After introducing a concept, pose a question that students can then take the next few minutes discussing. Questions that prompt students to consider their own personal values and opinions are especially effective.
Accountability
Knowing that your work could be seen/heard/experienced by your peers can be motivation to put more effort/thought into what it is you are doing. Telling students that random examples of their work will be shared with the class after the activity is a way to instill that sense of accountability. To ease the sense of anxiety, try to foster a “safe” learning environment by keeping the comments positive and leaning on student anonymity (unless it is to point out particularly stellar work).
Low tech response card system
Dividing a standard sheet of paper into four quadrants labeled A, B, C, and D is a low cost, low tech way to give students a “response card” system akin to “clickers”. Folding the sheet to reveal only one of the letters allows them to cast their vote. While the aspect of anonymity is removed with this system, negative student sentiments and “wrongness” anxiety can be lessened by nuanced execution. For example, having students all vote at the same time (i.e. at the count of 3) and asking them to hold their response card right below their face makes it so any “peeking” from peers is minimized (and if they do, they have to effectively look the person in the eyes).
Fill in the _________ lecturing
This is a way to involve students by having them vocally contribute to the lecture topic by having them fill in content. For example:
Instructor: “We live on the planet…”
Students: “Earth.”
Instructor: “Which orbits the…”
Students: “Sun.”
Instructor: “Which is a…”
Students: “Star.”
If a particular student’s response doesn’t match the chorus, they have the opportunity to learn something. However, if the student chorus is totally off from the expected response, you as the instructor have just learned something about your class.
What, overall, did I take away?
There are an array of tools/techniques that can enhance interactivity and student engagement. When thinking about using these tools in the classroom, keep in mind your own teaching style, and realize that lecturing (which is a tool) doesn’t have to be completely ditched in favor of using these engagement activities. In fact, test driving these techniques for a portion of the class/semester can help you decide whether or not to fully “buy” into them.
