There is more than one way to Flip a Classroom
A Finnish approach to teaching Mathematics
Mastery Learning and Flipped Education are currently sparking the imagination of Finnish educators. While he is not the first Finnish teacher to try out these concepts, Pekka Peura’s approach for teaching mathematics in high school has sparked a devoted following. Peura’s solution began with a frustration with the poor learning results in his maths and physics classrooms. What he ended up with is now widely known as Individual Learning or Yksilöllinen oppiminen, though he himself classifies it as Humanity Learning.
The approach is rooted in Bloom’s research and the finding that 80% of learners underachieve when the pace of learning is dependent on the teacher. While every fifth student does reach their learning potential, the rest are left frustrated either because the lessons are too easy for them, or because they can’t keep up. This concept is often used as an argument for streaming in schools, but the practice was abolished in Finnish schools a couple of decades ago when the Finnish eduction system was rebuilt to promote equity.
The problem with streaming is the assumption that a student won’t have a bad day, month or year at some point of their life and that a student has advanced skills in all areas of a subject or in all subjects. Interaction between students at different skill levels is also incredibly beneficial for both students, whether it be learning the actual matter at hand or practicing social skills.
Peura circumvents this issue by having all students in the same classroom, but allowing them to learn at their own pace. Instead of lecturing students, teachers in Humanity Learning classrooms spend their time helping students one by one. The students find the theory in their text books or on the internet and then practice the concepts with exercises assigned by the teacher. Many of his students work together on exercises, while others prefer to do them alone while listening to music. Some even spend their time helping others after they have completed the course in a couple of weeks.
The basics of Peura’s Humanity Learning
Each course (or other section in a curriculum) is defined in the terms of core, intermediate and advanced skills. The teacher collects exercises that are relevant to these skills, formulates the order in which the skills are to be practiced, and sets up a couple of checkpoints between core, intermediate and advanced skills. The checkpoints are tests which are self-assessed by the learner and also include a self-evaluation on how well the learner understands the concept. After passing the checkpoint the learner can move on to the more demanding assignments. Fast learners might complete the course in a week or two, while the slower ones might only complete the first checkpoint.
Instead of a final exam, the teacher discusses the grade with the student based upon the results of the checkpoints and the stage of advancement. Teachers that subscribe to Individual Learning are pretty vocal about how poorly exams measure learning and how it promotes “binge learning”. Students are crafty in how much energy they apply to their studies, so cramming for exams and forgetting it all later is an efficient learning strategy when evaluation is based on exams. Apparently most students have a realistic understanding of their true skills, so during the final evaluation the teacher and student are predominantly in agreement about the final grade.
Humanity Learning melds individual and collaboration learning into a communal classroom, where every individual has the space and support to learn as effectively as possible. Humanity Learning seems like a win-win situation.
The applicability of Subject Didactics
The concept of Mastery Learning is enticing, to say the least. During my school years exams were stressful evaluations rather than learning tools and there was very little freedom to move at one’s own pace. Many Finnish teachers are joining Peura’s group proclaiming it is the answer to their prayers.
My fear is that the clear-cut nature of Humanity Learning has convinced people into thinking this is an easy solution to all their problems with student motivation and learning. It sweeps away all the chaos with a clear system that puts everything in its right proper place. It speaks to the perfectionist nature that is common among educators. Can it truly be applied to any and every subject as some proclaim?
In accordance to Mastery Learning, Peura emphasises that his approach ensures that each student has gained at least the necessary basic skills before moving onto the next subject. This is important in Mathematics and Sciences, where new knowledge is built upon previous knowledge and it is impossible to understand advanced concepts without mastery of more basic ones. Another fruitful area has been second language learning that traditionally includes a sizeable chunk of rote learning.
However, learning in the arts and humanities is often more circular than linear as Tiina-Maria Päivänsalo notes in her excellent ponderations on the matter. We return to the same skills again and again to deepen our understanding of human activities. Mathematics is a perfect construction, while languages, culture and arts hold in them the same complexity as we as their source do. Instead of proof, humanities depend upon justifications. There are no wrong answers, only better ones. The teacher has a critical role as both guide and role model for developing skills in thinking, argumentation and creativity.
For me the biggest problem is that Humanity Learning doesn’t inherently include a way to incorporate student participation in either learning goals or along the way. The skills to be learned and the exercises are predefined by the teacher. Motivation always stems from interest and the more students can affect what is learned in school, the more useful it will be and seem to them. Unlike in Maths, many subject matters in the Arts and Humanities need very little preparation beforehand. The same skills can be practiced in various contexts, so there is no need to stick to a strict plan of advancement.
My teenage years taught me well on the fact that most people are not interested in things I am. However naïve it may be, I’m convinced everyone has something they are interested in. I believe the more I can nurture those interests with my own flexibility, the more successful I will be as a teacher.
Humanity Learning has its limitations. As a future First and Second Language teacher, I’m searching for the approaches and methods that will best suit me and my subject while promoting all the necessary 21st century skills. Perhaps Humanity Learning can be a part of that especially for more straightforward grammar exercises. It can free teacher attention and time to support individuals instead of groups. However, approaches like Project and Problem Based Learning, especially SOLE, seem like interesting options, even though the results can be unnervingly unpredictable.
