On March 30th I taught EOSC 221 students about megascale metamorphic processes (i.e., contact and regional metamorphism, pressure-temperature-time (P-T-t) paths, prograde and retrograde metamorphism) using a flipped-classroom approach. I approached teaching the class similar to how Lucy teaches her students (see my “Observation 2” post), where I assigned the students with asynchronous readings of the lesson notes 5-days before the synchronous lesson took place. For this practicum, I modified the pre-reading notes that Lucy originally created, I made the majority of the synchronous class questions, and I developed a new worksheet for the students to complete during the class. Lucy graciously provided me with feedback as I developed the worksheet and tested it out for me (she completed the worksheet as if she was a student) which was quite helpful as it made me aware of things I needed to modify before giving the activity to the students.
The synchronous portion of the lesson involved polling questions via the Zoom polling function or by annotating my Powerpoint slides, and discussion-based questions where students discussed their ideas in the Zoom chat and spoke aloud to explain how they came to their conclusions. After ~35 minutes, I assigned the students into break-out rooms with ~3 people per room where they applied the new concepts that they learnt about on the worksheet that I provided for them. During the time that they were working (~12 minutes), I jumped around into different rooms helping students with any questions they had. When the time was up, I pulled everyone from their small groups and briefly discussed some common questions students had and gave them instructions on where to upload the worksheet.
The teaching and learning theories that I implemented in my teaching approach (that I am aware of) include assessment and feedback and Experiential Learning Theory. The formative assessment involved the in-class polling and discussion questions where students received instant feedback and the summative assessment involved students working on an activity where they received some instant feedback, but most of the feedback was given after they submitted the activity. Using the flipped-classroom approach, students went through the experiential learning cycle as follows: (1) read through and thought about the class material beforehand, (2) came to class and thought about what they read and practiced applying their knowledge via the formative and summative feedback assessments, (3) reflected and thought about if they understood how they applied what they read, (4) thinking about how they could apply their knowledge differently for next time. In addition to the formative assessments, the worksheet activity provided an opportunity for students to apply their new knowledge and gain concrete experience in drawing and interpreting P-T-t paths from made-up garnet analyses in different metamorphic terranes (i.e., contact and regional). For this activity, I gave the students an example of how to plot and draw the first of six P-T-t paths. I wanted the students to have ~25-minutes to work on the activity, however, I only left students with 12-minutes because of poor time management. Although we ran out of time to complete the activity during class time, the students were given 2 days to complete the activity, where the submitted assignment is worth 1% of their overall grade. From looking through their completed worksheets, it is apparent that the students struggle with writing equations and deciphering between regional and subduction-related metamorphism. This feedback tells me that if I use this activity again to give the students more practice writing equations during the lesson (before the activity) and for me to better specify the differences between the different metamorphic terranes.
It was nice to see that the formative assessments I provided during the synchronous lesson (i.e., the polling and discussion questions) showed me that most of the students did the pre-readings and understood most of the key ideas. These questions I asked throughout the lesson provided not only me with feedback, but the students with feedback on their understanding of the ideas that they were learning about. I think that having set the expectation that the first portion of the class time is reserved for a mix of low-stakes questions seemed to make the students comfortable in participating in the polls, discussions, and annotating my slides. The students were also comfortable asking questions if they were looking for further clarification on an answer. Again, I think they were comfortable doing so because the class time is carved out for them to test themselves with the guidance of an instructor.
Regarding disciplinary attitudes, I was trying to teach the students how to use their critical thinking and interpretation skills with respect to large-scale processes through deep time in the reading materials and in the worksheet activity. To do this, students were given only a couple data points (i.e., Pmax and Tmax and their corresponding P’s and T’s) to plot for each path. Students then had to interpret a path that the rock sample would have taken by reflecting on how they think the samples moved from through the crust over time. When students began drawing their path, they became confused as they were not sure what rate a rock would be buried and uplifted. When they confronted this issue, they realized that the path is time and that geologic processes are dynamic through time, and that with a lack of data we cannot assume a particular path, thus we have to interpret the path with the information and knowledge we have.
From my practicum, I learnt that it is challenging to manage time in a flipped-classroom, where discussions may go on for longer than planned. If I were to teach this lesson again, I would ask fewer questions during the lesson time so that I could leave more time for the worksheet to be completed during the class time in their small groups – I did not at all account for how much time student questions would take up, which was the main factor for me going overtime. Allowing more time for the worksheet activity would encourage students to complete the worksheet and give them the opportunity to ask questions and get immediate feedback. Lucy and I briefly met right after the lesson, where she gave me some advice to save time if I were to use this approach again in the future. Regarding the formative assessments, she said if the majority of students get a question correct to confirm the answer and move on as the answer does not need an in-depth explanation. She also mentioned to me that I should practice saying student names when they answer questions in chat to help create more of a personal connection with them. I did think about doing this, however, I always get nervous about pronouncing people’s names wrong… But I can always ask for them to correct me, so I will definitely practice doing this more in the future. 🙂