For my study - about the effectiveness of using an in-class flipped model to differentiate in first grade math - I’m planning to collect and analyze quantitative data...at least, at first.
The plan is to give the students a pre-assessment for the math unit. Then, the students will learn the content of the unit by watching in-class screencasts at a math station (and, of course, meeting in small groups with me and working on various types of independent and partner practice). Finally, at the end of the unit, the students will take a post-assessment. I’ll then compare the scores of the pre- and post-assessments to quantitatively evaluate student learning. Presuming that this experiment in “flipping” yields promising results, I’d like to follow up with several additional types of analyses. First, I’d like to repeat the study with a similar quantitative analysis for a different type of math unit. I wonder if this type of in-class flip might work better with some math concepts/units than others, so it would be revealing to experiment with other units like geometry or graphing. Second, I’d like to repeat the study without using an in-class flip for a similar math unit. I’d then compare the post-assessment results for the flipped and un-flipped units. It would be revealing to quantitatively see the difference (if any) in student learning between the two. Third, I’d like to include a qualitative analysis of student perceptions of their flipped experience. So much of how first graders learn is driven both by their enjoyment and by their feelings of self-efficacy. Do the students enjoy learning from the screencasts? Do the students think that the screencasts keep their attention as well as a teacher would? And do the students believe that they are good at learning math from the screencasts? Do they think that they are growing as math learners? Finally, I’d like to include qualitative data about the impact of this model on the teacher. Does an in-class flip require significantly more or less planning? Does the screencasting have an up-front increase in preparation and planning, yet significantly make math group rotations more smooth? Is the increase in preparation worth the (hopefully) increase in results?
2 Comments
My driving question is: What are the effects of using screencasts on differentiated learning using an in-class flipped model?
The educational context for this driving question is really a combination of the need for differentiation with the benefits of a flipped classroom. There’s a huge diversity in any classroom. In my classroom alone, there are students who speak English and some who don’t. There are kids who are still building number sense, and those who understand the basis for multiplication. There are kids with well-developed fine motor skills, and those who can’t properly hold a pencil. There are kids who just turned 6, and those who just turned 7. All of these - and more - necessitate differentiation. There’s also a huge range of readiness for independent work in my classroom. At any moment, there may be half a dozen students who need my attention or who have a question. There may be students who can read directions, and those who can’t. There are students who know how to use resources around the room to help themselves, and those who don’t. There are students who “ask three and then me,” and students who only “ask me.” There are students who need more support, and students who need less. All of these reasons - and more - necessitate accessible (and appropriate) curricula and directions for all students at all times. This content can be provided by screencasts in a flipped model. The intersection of all of these needs provides the educational context for my driving question: what are the effects of using screencasts on differentiated learning using an in-class flipped model? My driving question is: What are the effects of using an in-class flipped model for differentiation in a first grade classroom? So, my research lies somewhere in the intersection of differentiation and flipped learning.
At the core of differentiated learning is Lev Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development. The ZPD is the learning “zone” in which students are learning material that is too difficult to master on their own, but that can be learned with guidance and encouragement. This is the zone in which true learning occurs. If students are working beneath their ZPD, then the material is too easy. If they are working beyond their ZPD, then the material is too hard. Teaching students within their ZPDs is one of the goals of differentiated instruction. In the field of differentiation, one of the seminal researchers is Carol Ann Tomlinson. She is known as a major advocate for differentiation in the classroom as a way of addressing the needs of all learners. Her philosophy is encapsulated in this quote from her website: “The idea of differentiating instruction is an approach to teaching that advocates active planning for and attention to student differences in classrooms, in the context of high quality and curriculums.” Tomlinson discusses how curriculum can be differentiated by content, process, and products; within these areas, the learning can be further differentiated by a student’s readiness, interest, and learning profile. In the area of flipped learning, Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams are two of the premier researchers. According to Bergmann and Sams, flipped learning is “a pedagogical approach in which the direct instruction moves from the group learning space to the individual learning space,and the resulting group space is transformed into a dynamic, interactive learning environment where the educator guides students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.” They are known for discovering the idea of flipped learning when trying to find ways to maximize the benefit of “face to face” in-class time with their students. Bermann and Sams are advocates of the “flipped mastery model,” which implements mastery learning (all students master the objectives, though at different paces and in different ways) using the flipped model. They also elaborate on additional benefits of a flipped learning, including using the recorded lessons for students who were absent or who need to review material. Coincidentally, this dovetails with differentiation, in which students learn at different paces and in different ways, depending upon their different learning needs. As Bergmann and Sams say, “Flipped learning, at its core, is individualized learning.” |
Masters in Innovative Learning:
|