Classroom of the Future?
The New York Times recently published an article describing MIT’s TEAL (Technology Enhanced Active Learning) classrooms used in introductory physics courses. The classrooms enable an interactive class format in which students work problems in small groups during class as professors and TAs circulate and answer questions, replacing the traditional lecture model used for these courses. Classroom response systems are used to monitor student progress and learning during class. I like this quote from Harvard physics professor Eric Mazur:
“Just as you can’t become a marathon runner by watching marathons on TV,” Professor Mazur said, “likewise for science, you have to go through the thought processes of doing science and not just watch your instructor do it.”
The TEAL classrooms cost $2.5 million each, but, of course, many aspects of the pedagogy used with the classrooms can be implemented for much less. See the SCALE-Up site at North Carolina State University for more information on effective classroom design. Classroom design can have a significant impact on the learning experiences of students, so it’s important to consider pedagogy when designing (or redesigning) classrooms. That being said, one of the reasons I’m a fan of clickers is that they can be used to facilitate aspects of the TEAL pedagogy (like peer instruction) in any kind of classroom.
According to the NYT article, MIT is having great success with the new model for teaching physics. According to some of the comments on the article, students at MIT aren’t all happy with the new approach. Here’s a quote from Chris, a recent MIT graduate:
“Personal response clickers”? Ask any student how they feel about them and discover that they’d much rather hurl them into the Charles than actually use them, if not for the fact that participation points are oftentimes given out as inducements for clicking.
As one of the other comments points out, this kind of negative response might be related to the fact that prior to the change to the TEAL classrooms, attendance rates in these courses would often drop below 50 percent. As productive as active learning approaches can be, I think it’s important to remember that some students will resist these approaches. I wish Chris would have elaborated on why students might want to throw their clickers in the Charles River. I have some hypotheses, but I’m curious to know (a) if you’ve experienced student resistence to active learning and (b) why you think students sometimes resist these approaches.