At the start of a previous semester I was asked to take on an additional course after long-term faculty member had decided to retire. I spent the first week of the semester trying to identify how I could effectively teach the course and ensure my new students received the best possible education. The course - Business Law - was very theory/knowledge based but had the opportunity to incorporate many case studies. During that same week, the University I work for offered a short seminar on Active Learning. They had invited an instructor to campus to talk about how they had arranged a Chemistry course into a more active format for the students. Essentially this Chemistry instructor would lecture on an activity and then facilitate an activity over the lectured materials. It was obvious to me that active learning would work well in classes with lab components/requirements, but could it work in a course that was theory/knowledge based like Business Law?
To be honest one of the reasons I was willing to try active learning was because I was attracted to the shorter lecture. I was nervous about lecturing on topics in which JD's usually were hired to teach, and thought using active learning techniques would allow me to cut back on the time I needed to prep and lecture. I was very wrong about that, however. Prep for each class averaged 5-6 hours. Prep included identifying the appropriate material to cover in the lecture, identifying the best way to present that material, creating a challenging activity to use in the 'active' portion of the class, and developing my own responses and answers to the activity.
The other reason I was interested in trying the technique was based on feedback I had received in other courses. This feedback included requests for more activities and less lecture. After doing reading and research on the adult learner (see my other blogs on this topic) I felt that a change in the classroom was needed. I now refer to my teaching method as collaborative learning (a version of active learning). It was a way to 'flip' the class, requiring the students to do the reading and research on the class materials prior to class (outside of class), and allow me to focus the class time on targeted, concentrated topics most directed toward the course objectives.
I started the first class by having the students stand up and introduce themselves to someone in the class they did not know. I allowed them approximately 3 minutes to do this. Then I asked them to switch and find someone else in the class they did not know, again for three minutes each. I asked the student to repeat this several times until they had each talked to at least 4 or 5 people. I then asked them to identify 3 to 4 people they would want to work with in a team. I gave them approximately 10 minutes to complete this activity. I did have to do some rearranging of students but the teams were set during this first class. I explained to them that this team would be their 'partners' for the rest of the semester. They would rely on each other for help, answers, and the final project. I explained that each member was important as the teams were small. If one member was out, it would put a strain on the other members of the team. I also discussed a free-rider clause. If one member of the team was not performing actively, the other members could request a free-rider review and I would address this individually with the accused. If they were found to be a free-rider, they would lose all points for the classes in question.
I need to step back here and talk about how the class was organized. This course was also being taught be another instructor (a JD) who had several years of experience with this, and other law courses. She was a valuable resource to me during the semester. She had an outline of the chapters that were typically covered and when assessments were normally administered. I followed her outline to ensure continuity in the content between the courses. I also used the same test banks for the tests. The questions were different, but based on the same materials. I did move slower in the course that the other instructor recommended. Because of the shorter lectures, and more concentrated focus on the objectives, the chapters/topics were often spread out over two, some even three, class periods. I would assess the students after approximately 3 - 4 chapters. There was a final exam and a presentation on a class objective also required. (more on this later).
This particular class met on Tuesdays and Thursdays, so I had more time than the traditional 50 minutes. I would lecture approximately 15 - 20 minutes at the start of each class. This was a refresher or a clarifier as the students were expected to have reviewed the materials prior to class. The next 30 - 40 minutes was an in-depth and challenging activity. Some examples of activities included case analysis, case studies, and what would you do type questions. For example, I would find a case in which the subject matter coincided with the materials being covered that session and I would hide the decision to the case. I would ask the teams to evaluate the facts, evaluate the laws that applied, and come to a decision. I would try and find unusual and fun cases to evaluate to peak their interests. During this activity time, I would walk around the class, going to each team, and participate in their discussions. Student would ask questions, share their answers and challenge me on the topics. For me, this was one of the most rewarding portions of class.
One of the concerns I originally had incorporating active learning was the fear that teams would not put forth effort. They would make a few guesses and spend the rest of the time chatting or checking their phones for the latest gossip. To overcome this issue, I decided that at the end of each class I would randomly select a team and ask them share their answers with the rest of the class. I would ask the first question and they would respond with their answer. I would then ask if anyone else in the class had any other answer. We would have a discussion on the differences. In some cases, if there was a 'right' answer, I would share this with them and explain the reasoning. This is the 'collaboration'. The students loved this part. I often had to ask students to hold their answers or comments until another student finished. We had a lot of good discussion during this part of the class.
The most controversial part of the class is how I graded these activities. I have talked with several other instructors on this and many of them expressed concern with the method I used. However, I am adamant that the class would not have been so successful any other way. I would give each student who 'participated' and was in attendance 10 points for each activity. They had an opportunity to earn up to 40% of their overall grade by just coming to class and participating in the activity and discussion. So many of the activities we covered did not have 'right' answers, it was unfair for me to critically evaluate each answer. Instead I would ask each student who was in attendance to sign the worksheet and they would each earn the 10 points. I know some of you who have experience teaching had the same reaction to the 40% as my peers did - first a gasp and then a negative response similar to "that is way to high, you are watering down their real grade". I have some pretty strong feelings on what some of you call grade inflation - and what I call pay for participation. But I will save those for another upcoming post. Irregardless of your position on this, I have evidence that it worked. Attendance was over 98% for the semester (and that includes excused absences).
Finally, each team was to select a topic from the list of course objectives and go into detail on that particular item. As someone who has several years of experience in business and business management, presentation skills are a must for an organizational manager/leader. The students had to present their topics to the rest of the class. These presentations were done at the end of the semester and were graded based on topic depth, use of examples, presentation skills, etc. It allowed a team to specialize in a topic of their choice and was a great way to end the course.
Although I had ulterior motives for the active learning, and was naive about the prep time required, it turned out better than can be expected. The students assessment scores were very high and attendance was nearly perfect. Their feedback on the layout of the course was also very positive. They were attending, participating, engaged, and learning. What more could an instructor ask for?
I plan on continuing this series with the next topic covering the responses I received from the students during the class and contained in the student evaluations, including more information on attendance and overall scores. I also had another instructor attend one class and do a peer review of my course and I will provide his feedback. Finally, I hope to present the comparison of attendance and grades between the course I taught and the other business law course taught by the other instructor. The results of this class were so strong, I am converting all my courses to this format in the Fall. Thankfully I have all summer to prepare the activities and lectures, but I will be interesting to see if a new group of students have the same positive experiences in a different course.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Hello