skip to main content

Title: Ultra-Short Presentations with Immediate in-Class Public Feedback to Enhance Skill Development with Low Class Time and Instructor Time
The development of oral presentation skills requires multiple opportunities to present and receive focused feedback. In typical discipline-based and general-education courses, class time is precious, and even when oral presentations are part of a course, students may receive only one or two opportunities to present with feedback. Here we describe an approach to develop presentation skills with ultra-short, one-minute presentations followed immediately by brief, supportive, focused, public in-class instructor feedback. Feedback is offered as one positive comment (one thing I liked) and one targeted goal for improvement (one thing to work on). The short time frame maximizes the number of iterative cycles of practice, feedback, and implementation of feedback. This approach was used with students in several semester-long courses offering three to eight opportunities to present. Students took anonymous surveys immediately after the experience and again up to two and a half years post-experience. Over 95% reported that they learned a great deal about how to improve their own presentations by watching other presentations and hearing the instructor’s immediate feedback. Respondents reported lasting gains in skills, increased confidence in their public speaking abilities, and all would recommend the experience to others.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Date Published:
Journal Name:
College Teaching
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1 to 10
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)

    Student presentation based effective teaching (SPET) approach was designed to engage students with different mindsets and academic preparation levels meaningfully and meet several ABET student learning outcomes. SPET method requires that students prepare themselves by guided self-study before coming to the class and make presentations to teach the whole class by (a) presenting complex concepts and systems appealingly and engagingly, and most importantly (b) serving as the discussion platform for the instructor to emphasize on complex concepts from multiple angles during different presentations. In class, SPET presentations address the conceptual questions that are assigned 1–2 weeks before the presentation day. However, the SPET approach becomes impractical for large class sizes because (i) during one class period all the students can not present, (ii) many students do not make their sincere efforts. This paper focuses on the second modification of SPET to make it practical for large classes. The method reported in this paper was tested on MECH 462 Design of Energy System Course. Unlike the first modified approach, all the students were expected to submit the response to the preassigned questions before coming to the class. In class, SPET group presentations were prepared by the group of 3–6 students, who prepared themselves by doing SPET conceptual questions individually. Students communicated with each other to make a cohesive presentation for ∼30 min. In two classes per week, we covered 5–6 group presentations to do enough discussions and repetition of the core concepts for a more in-depth understanding of the content. During the presentation, each student was evaluated for (a) their depth of understanding, (b) understanding other parts of the presentation covered by other teammates, and (c) quality of presentation and content. The student who appeared unprepared in the class group presentation were provided direct feedback and resources to address concerning areas. SPET approach was applied in the online mode during the campus shut down due to COVID-19. SPET was immensely effective and helped to complete the course learning outcomes without interruptions. SPET could be customized for the online version without any additional preparation on the instructor part.

    more » « less
  2. Instructor-led presentation-based teaching mainly focuses on delivering content. Whereas student active presentations-based teaching approaches require students to take leadership in learning actions. Many teaching and learning strategies were adopted to foster active student participation during in-class learning activities. We developed the student presentation-based effective teaching (SPET) approach in 2014 to make student presentation activity the central element of learning challenging concepts. We have developed several versions to meet the need for teaching small classes (P. Tyagi, "Student Presentation Based Effective Teaching (SPET) Approach for Advanced Courses," in ASME IMECE 2016-66029, V005T06A026), large enrolment classes (P. Tyagi, "Student Presentation Based Teaching (SPET) Approach for Classes With Higher Enrolment," ASME IMECE 2018-88463, V005T07A035), and online teaching during COVID-19. (P. Tyagi, "Second Modified Student Presentation Based Effective Teaching (SPET) Method Tested in COVID-19 Affected Senior Level Mechanical Engineering Course," in ASME IMECE 2020-23615, V009T09A026). The SPET approach has successfully engaged students with varied interests and competence levels in the learning process. SPET approach has also made it possible to cover new topics such as training engineering students about positive intelligence skills to foster lifelong learning aptitude and doing engineering projects in a group setting. However, it was noted that many students who were overwhelmed with parallel academic demands in other courses and different activities were underperforming via SPET-based learning strategies. SPET core functioning depends on the following steps: Step 1: Provide a set of conceptual and topical questions for students to answer individually after self-education from the recommended textbook or course material, Step-2: Group presentations are prepared by the prepared students for in-class discussion, Step-3: Group makes a presentation in class 1-2 weeks after the day of the assignment to seek instructor feedback and to do peer discussion. The instructor noted that students unfamiliar with the new concepts and terminologies in the SPET assignment struggled to respond to questions individually and contribute to the group discussion based on their presentation. Several motivated students who invested time in familiarizing new concepts and terminologies met or exceeded the expectations. However, a significant student population struggled. To alleviate this issue author has implemented a further improvement in SPET approach. This paper reports teaching experiments conducted in MECH 487 Photovoltaic Cells and Solar Thermal Energy System and MECH 462 Design of Energy Systems course. This improvement requires augmenting SPET with instructor-led concept familiarization discussion on the day of issuing the assignment or close to that; for this step instructor utilized exemplary student work from prior SPET-based teaching of the same course. In the survey, many students expressed their views about the improvement and reported introductory discussions were helpful and addressed several reservations and impediments students encountered. This paper will discuss the structure of the new improvement strategy and outcomes-including student feedback and comments. 
    more » « less
  3. null (Ed.)
    In this paper, we study a computerized exam system that allows students to attempt the same question multiple times. This system permits students either to receive feedback on their submitted answer immediately or to defer the feedback and grade questions in bulk. An analysis of student behavior in three courses across two semesters found similar student behaviors across courses and student groups. We found that only a small minority of students used the deferred feedback option. A clustering analysis that considered both when students chose to receive feedback and either to immediately retry incorrect problems or to attempt other unfinished problems identified four main student strategies. These strategies were correlated to statistically significant differences in exam scores, but it was not clear if some strategies improved outcomes or if stronger students tended to prefer certain strategies. 
    more » « less
  4. Peer feedback is a central activity for project-based design education. The prevalence of devices carried by students and the emergence of novel peer feedback systems enables the possibility of collecting and sharing feedback immediately between students during class. However, pen and paper is thought to be more familiar, less distracting for students, and easier for instructors to implement and manage. To evaluate the efficacy of in-class digital feedback systems, we conducted a within-subjects study with 73 students during two weeks of a game design course. After short student presentations, while instructors provided verbal feedback, peers provided feedback either on paper or through a device. The study found that both methods yielded comments of similar quality and quantity, but the digital approach provided additional ways for students to participate and required less effort from the instructors. While both methods produced similar behaviors, students held inaccurate perceptions about their behavior with each method. We discuss design implications for technologies to support in-class feedback exchange. 
    more » « less
  5. Peer feedback systems enable students to get feedback without substantially burdening the instructor. However, current systems typically ask students to provide feedback after class; this introduces challenges for ensuring relevant, timely, diverse, and sufficient amounts of feedback, and reduces time available for student reflection. This paper explores the current landscape of peer feedback tools and introduces a novel system for in-class peer review called PeerPresents where students can quickly exchange feed-back on projects without being burdened by additional work outside of class. Through an exploratory study with Google docs and a preliminary evaluation of PeerPresents, we find students can receive immediate, copious, and diverse peer feedback through a structured in-class activity. Students also described the feedback they received as helpful and reported that they gave more feedback than without using the system. These early results demonstrate the potential benefits of in-class peer feedback systems. 
    more » « less