An official website of the United States government
Objectives The traditional, instructor-led form of live coding has been extensively studied, with findings showing that this form of live coding imparts similar learning to static-code examples. However, a concern with Traditional Live Coding is that it can turn into a passive learning activity for students as they simply observe the instructor program. Therefore, this study compares Active Live Coding—a form of live coding that leverages in-class coding activities and peer discussion—to Traditional Live Coding on three outcomes: 1) students’ adherence to effective programming processes, 2) students’ performance on exams and in-lecture questions, and 3) students’ lecture experience. Participants Roughly 530 students were enrolled in an advanced, CS1 course taught in Java at a large, public university in North America. The students were primarily first- and second-year undergraduate students with some prior programming experience. The student population was spread across two lecture sections—348 students in the Active Live Coding (ALC) lecture and 185 students in the Traditional Live Coding (TLC) lecture. Study Methods We used a mixed-methods approach to answer our‘ research questions. To compare students’ programming processes, we applied process-oriented metrics related to incremental development and error frequencies. To measure students’ learning outcomes, we compared students’ performance on major course components and used pre- and post-lecture questionnaires to compare students’ learning gain during lectures. Finally, to understand students’ lecture experience, we used a classroom observation protocol to measure and compare students’ behavioral engagement during the two lectures. We also inductively coded open-ended survey questions to understand students’ perceptions of live coding. Findings We did not find a statistically significant effect of ALC on students’ programming processes or learning outcomes. It seems that both ALC and TLC impart similar programming processes and result in similar student learning. However, our findings related to students’ lecture experience shows a persistent engagement effect of ALC, where students’ behavioral engagement peaks andremains elevatedafter the in-class coding activity and peer discussion. Finally, we discuss the unique affordances and drawbacks of the lecture technique as well as students’ perceptions of ALC. Conclusions Despite being motivated by well-established learning theories, Active Live Coding did not result in improved student learning or programming processes. This study is preceded by several prior works that showed that Traditional Live Coding imparts similar student learning and programming skills as static-code examples. Though potential reasons for the lack of observed learning benefits are discussed in this work, multiple future analyses to further investigate Active Live Coding may help the community understand the impacts (or lack thereof) of the instructional technique.
more »
« less
Instructor Use of Movable Furniture and Technology in Flexible Classroom Spaces
Flexible classroom spaces, which have movable tables and chairs that can be easily rearranged into different layouts, make it easier for instructors to effectively implement active learning than a traditional lecture hall. Instructors can move throughout the room to interact with students during active learning, and they can rearrange the tables into small groups to facilitate conversation between students. Classroom technology, such as wall-mounted monitors and movable whiteboards, also facilitates active learning by allowing students to collaborate. In addition to enabling active learning, the flexible classroom can still be arranged in front-facing rows that support traditional lecture-based pedagogies. As a result, instructors do not have to make time- and effort-intensive changes to the way their courses are taught in order to use the flexible classroom. Instead, they can make small changes to add active learning. We are in the second year of a study of flexible classroom spaces funded by the National Science Foundation’s Division of Undergraduate Education. This project asks four research questions that investigate the relationships between the instructor, the students, and the classroom: 1) What pedagogy do instructors use in a flexible classroom space? 2) How do instructors take advantage of the instructional affordances (including the movable furniture, movable whiteboards, wall-mounted whiteboards, and wall-mounted monitors) of a flexible classroom? 3) What is the impact of faculty professional development on instructors’ use of flexible classroom spaces? and 4) How does the classroom influence the ways students interpret and engage in group learning activities? In the first year of our study we have developed five research instruments to answer these questions: a three-part classroom observation protocol, an instructor interview protocol, two instructor surveys, and a student survey. We have collected data from nine courses taught in one of ten flexible classrooms at the University of Michigan during the Fall 2018 semester. Two of these courses were first-year introduction to engineering courses co-taught by two instructors, and the other seven courses were sophomore- and junior-level core technical courses taught by one instructor. Five instructors participated in a faculty learning community that met three times during the semester to discuss active learning, to learn how to make the best use of the flexible classroom affordances, and to plan activities to implement in their courses. In each course we gathered data from the perspective of the instructor (through pre- and post-semester interviews), the researcher (through observations of three class meetings with our observation protocol), and the students (through conducting a student survey at the end of the semester). This poster presents qualitative and qualitative analyses of these data to answer our research questions, along with evidence based best practices for effectively using a flexible classroom.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1711533
- PAR ID:
- 10114599
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- ASEE annual conference & exposition proceedings
- ISSN:
- 2153-5868
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)We investigated how changing the physical classroom impacted graduate teaching assistant (GTA) and student behaviors in tutorial sections of an introductory algebra-based physics sequence. Using a modified version of the Laboratory Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (LOPUS), we conducted 35 observations over two semesters for seven GTAs who taught in different styles of classrooms (i.e., active learning classrooms and traditional classrooms). We found that both GTAs and students changed behaviors in response to a change from an active learning classroom to a traditional classroom. GTAs were found to be less interactive with student groups and to lecture at the whiteboard more frequently. Correspondingly, student behaviors changed as students asked fewer questions during one-on-one interactions. These findings suggest that the instructional capacity framework, which typically focuses on interactions between instructors, students and instructional materials, should also include interactions with the learning space. We suggest administrators and departments consider the impact of changing to a traditional classroom when implementing student-centered instruction and emphasize how to use classroom space in GTA professional development.more » « less
-
This methods paper describes the development, use, and initial findings for the Focus and Actions of Students and Teachers Observation Protocol (FASTOP). The ICAP model describes the benefits of interactive (I), constructive (C), and active (A) learning over passive (P) learning. However, instructors who seek to adopt more effective pedagogies often overestimate their use of such practices and/or omit key elements. Thus, our research seeks to enhance understanding of classroom practice by combining data from student surveys, instructor surveys, and classroom observations (both live and video recorded). This paper describes a new classroom observation protocol intended to monitor the focus (e.g., solo, pair, team, or whole class) and action (e.g., discuss, speak/present, watch/listen, or distracted) of both students and teachers (instructors). The paper summarizes relevant background on evidence-based learning, student engagement, and classroom observation protocols, describes the development and structure of FASTOP, presents results from different pedagogies (e.g., lecture, laboratory, POGIL), and describes lessons learned and future directions. Results show distinctive patterns of student and teacher behaviors for different pedagogies.more » « less
-
Starting in March 2020, the COVID19 pandemic instantly affected the education of 14 million higher education students in the USA. The switch to remote instruction caught instructors and students off guard – teachers had to change their techniques, approaches, and course content rapidly (called “panicgogy”), and students had to adjust to remote instruction in a hurry. Hoping that the pandemic would not last too long, most had expected to return to the regular class format at most by the Fall semester. That expectation was quickly squashed as the summer semester progressed. If one were teaching a face-to-face classroom in a flipped modality, it would be even more challenging to teach a flipped class in an online environment. In this paper, we present how the instructor overhauled a face-to-face flipped class in Numerical Methods to an online environment. This involved 1) rethinking the learning design of the course content via the learning management system, 2) using Microsoft forms as personal response systems, and YouTube for video lectures, 3) not only using break-out rooms for peer-to-peer learning but the “main room” for individual learning as well, 4) exploit the availability of two computers and multiple monitors to deliver and observe the synchronous part of the class, 5) use of discussion boards to streamline the flow of communication that would have otherwise been unwieldy for the instructor, TAs, and students alike, 6) changes made to assessment as it had to be carried online and within a proctoring software environment, 7) changes in the conducting of office hours. The above items will be discussed in the paper, and comparisons of face-to-face and online implementations will be made. The ultimate goal is to present a logic model for a typical lecture-based online flipped STEM classroom for efficient and effective implementation by other instructors.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)This research paper studies the challenges that mathematics faculty and graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) faced when moving active and collaborative calculus courses from in-person to virtual instruction. As part of a larger pedagogical change project (described below), the math department at a public Research-1 university began transitioning pre-calculus and calculus courses to an active and collaborative learning (ACL) format in Fall 2019. The change began with the introduction of collaborative worksheets in recitations which were led by GTAs and supported by undergraduate learning assistants (LAs). Students recitation periods collaboratively solving the worksheet problems on whiteboards. When COVID-19 forced the rapid transition to online teaching, these ACL efforts faced an array of challenges. Faculty and GTA reflections on the changes to teaching and learning provide insight into how instructional staff can be supported in implementing ACL across various modes of instruction. The calculus teaching change efforts discussed in this paper are part of an NSF-supported project that aims to make ACL the default method of instruction in highly enrolled gateway STEM courses across the institution. The theoretical framework for the project builds on existing work on grassroots change in higher education (Kezar and Lester, 2011) to study the effect of communities of practice on changing teaching culture. The project uses course-based communities of practice (Wenger, 1999) that include instructors, GTAs, and LAs working together to design and enact teaching change in the targeted courses alongside ongoing professional development for GTAs and LAs. Six faculty and five GTAs involved in the teaching change effort in mathematics were interviewed after the Spring 2020 semester ended. Interview questions focused on faculty and GTA experiences implementing active learning after the rapid transition to online teaching. A grounded coding scheme was used to identify common themes in the challenges faced by instructors and GTAs as they moved online and in the impacts of technology, LA support, and the department community of practice on the move to online teaching. Technology, including both access and capabilities, emerged as a common barrier to student engagement. A particular barrier was students’ reluctance to share video or participate orally in sessions that were being recorded, making group work more difficult than it had been in a physical classroom. In addition, most students lacked access to a tablet for freehand writing, presenting a significant hurdle for sharing mathematical notation when physical whiteboards were no longer an option. These challenges point to the importance of incorporating flexibility in active learning implementation and in the professional development that supports teaching changes toward active learning, since what is conceived for a collaborative physical classroom may be implemented in a much different environment. The full paper will present a detailed analysis of the data to better understand how faculty and GTA experiences in the transition to online delivery can inform planning and professional development as the larger institutional change effort moves forward both in mathematics and in other STEM fields.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
