04 - Focus as a teacher [Massive Teaching]

From Week 1 Lecture Videos of "Teaching goes massive: new skills required"
by Paul-Olivier Dehaye
See
https://etherpad.mozilla.org/pr8ZtLXODg
and
http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2014/07/09/congrats-to-paul-olivier-dehaye-massiveteaching/

As I said a lot of new technology is being
built.

But it's very easy to be distracted by
this technology.

It's easy to forget what to focus on
because of all the shiny visuals.

Simultaneously technology can open new
doors

or put in new constraints on our pedagogy.

So let's think again, let's refocus.

When we teach what should we care about
the most?

While I have some practical experience as an instructor,

but I am not an expert in education.

So I rely on an influential study by John
Hattie

He looked at 800 meta analyses and
synthesized them.

He was looking for what influences
learning,

which circumstances, tools and techniques
had

the best effects, or which just had average
effects.

So let's pick and choose a few of those
factors in no order at the moment.

The first is physical attributes.

The class size, for instance.

It's clear that this is relevant in a MOOC
setting.

The second factor is computer-assisted
instruction.

It's also clear that this is crucial in a MOOC

There are other factors that will affect
teaching.

Things that are maybe more intrinsic to
the student.

Course, we would like to think that we can
teach anyone, but we expect the

students' disposition to learn, their
intrinsic motivation, to

have to be a factor in the outcome.

In some way, MOOCs have a self-selected
audience for now so this is mitigated.

There's also the factor of the student's
prior cognitive ability.

Think of something like their IQ, for
instance.

We have little control there.

Fortunately, there are parts we can
actively change.

The instructional quality of the course,
for instance.

That is, the student's perception of the
quality of the instruction they get,

according to Hattie's definition.

What about individualization?

The design of a learning program
specific to the student.

Or maybe mastery learning.

This is when students are given tests

on relatively easy material soon after
instruction.

And if it seems necessary they're given more work again.

They're retested until they get it.

Maybe a teacher could challenge students
by outlining goals,

but there is also feedback, which in Hattie's
mind, includes

positive reinforcement for what has been
done well, information about

what needs to improve but also includes merely clarifying the goals,

as part of the feedback.

There's also peer tutoring, where the

students explain, check, and assess each
other.

How about a good old test?

How about external factors, such as the
presence of a television at home?

Hattie identified 130 different such
factors.

I only picked a few here.

But it's already a lot of influencers on
the student's achievement.

But how do you rank them so we could make

sense of the potential thug of that large
number of influencers [sic: influences]?

So what do you think ranked the best?

What ranked the worst?

You can maybe guess that television is the
worst.

That seems kind of an obvious candidate.

In fact, television slowed down a student's progress.

Next up, and very controversially, was class
size.

This is still very much at the bottom; in
fact the data indicates

inconclusively that small class sizes have

a tiny positive effect on the student's
learning.

The best way to make sense of this is probably

to better understand Hattie's methodology.

This result comes after accounting for all

the other effects, if all else remains
equal.

So if a politician somewhere bases a
decision on this study, and

blindly doubles the class size of all the
classrooms in their country -

presumably, importantly, by firing half of the
teachers -

well the teachers that remain will suddenly be swamped with work.

And unable to do some of the other

techniques that actually have a very
positive effect.

So this would be bad.

Now on to the positive effects.

When Hattie performed this study he very
well understood

that most of those techniques had a
positive effect.

The point was to identify those that were
MOST effective.

So he set the bar at the average effect
size.

Obviously we're interested in the top
effects, those way above the bar.

But we should proceed methodically.

Below that bar, still with a positive
effect

but not so great, are computer assisted
instruction,

individualization, and testing.

Above that, and in a position that starts
to be

very useful, are challenging students with
goal [sic: goals],

peer tutoring, mastery learning, and, slightly

above all those three, the student's disposition to learn.

But the three stellar effects are feedback,

student's prior cognitive ability,

and instructional quality.

Each is at a level where you expect a 50%
increase in the pace of learning.

Of course feedback is a bit of an umbrella
term here.

It covers pure feedback or mastery
learning, for instance.

Note, also, that computer-assisted goes up

as the course becomes more interactive
and more engaging. And also that smaller

effects can be combined to accumulate traction.

So nothing should be fully dismissed.

So, we now have Hattie's final ranking for
the effects I've selected.

Why am I talking about this?

Well, because in MOOCs some of it is
especially relevant.

Mastery learning has been trumpeted again and again for MOOCs.

You can offer a quiz, sampling questions and answers until the student gets it.

Interaction as well. More and more MOOCs have interactive components

that students can use to visually see what
they are learning.

So this is all a success story for MOOCs

integrating fully those effects in the
format, if you want.

Peer effects are also important and also
present in MOOCS.

But they're not fully mastered yet.

There are some structured peer grading
components in MOOCS

but they're still in early stages and can
be improved.

Also, few people know for sure how to get
a forum started,

one that encourages students from all
backgrounds to engage with their peers.

I'm certainly not one of those
experts.

It's a skill, something that needs to be
learned and practiced.

Some of those experts, on the other hand,
might be lurking in this class.

So please help the discussion get started
on the forums, if you feel you can help.

I would love to engage with all of you.

Share your opinion, don't be afraid.

There's definitely no right or wrong.

Even Hattie's study is open to criticism.

And especially my retelling of it.

This is education. There is no one answer.

So, I would love to have a discussion on
the forums about all that.

The last effect I want to discuss, that
will be the

next video, is the most important, according
to Hattie: that is "feedback".