Originally Posted by DAD22
Apparently there is some research into the effectiveness of flipped classrooms:

http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/teaching-guides/teaching-activities/flipping-the-classroom/

"Mazur and colleagues have published results suggesting that the PI method results in significant learning gains when compared to traditional instruction (2001)."

This isn't a flipped classroom. Mazur teaches interactively, which is entirely different from the flipped model being discussed here. For the sake of precision, "flipped" here as defined in that link I used has means "students watch videos at home and do homework in class."

What Mazur does is probably a highly effective technique that 22B alluded to back on page 1 of this thread, and which HowlerKarma clearly practices: mixed lecturing and tutorial-type instruction. PM me with an email address if you want a copy of the article.

Originally Posted by DAD22
"The 85 students in the flipped course at San Jose State watched the edX lecture videos...

College students. This discussion is about the perils of using this model in a K-12 environment, which is very different from college students. They're more mature (executive function) and have chosen to be there.


Quote
"Among the students in the study who had valid scores on the pre and post course assessment, the results were similar for the treatment and the control group.


This is a blog post and not a peer-reviewed article. And the author admits the following very serious shortcomings:

"First, no statistician will take our results particularly seriously, and they shouldn’t. The sample size is too small to attribute any real significance to the findings. Secondly, the pilot was very brief, lasting only five weeks, or twenty-four class sessions of two hours each."

I'm a scientist. I know that stuff that can look so good in a pilot experiment, yet be proven wrong when you do the real thing. This is just so common.





Last edited by Val; 07/10/13 01:37 PM.