The Flipped Classroom And The Role Of Expectations

In 2005-2006, I was enrolled in a master’s program at Stanford University School of Education. The method most professors used seemed different from what I was used to and expecting. The usual classroom drill involves teachers being the “sage on the stage” instead of being a “guide on the side”. Unprepared students sit through the class listening, watching, and learning concepts for the first time. Most of what they learn is forgotten the same day or the next day. Later, when they read the books or do their homework, the content seems new, and they start from scratch. Valuable time spent in the classroom with a knowledgeable teacher is lost.

The flipped classroom
In the last few years, the concept of a flipped classroom has been gaining momentum. Instead of a teacher explaining the concepts, students learn the concepts, mainly by watching online videos, before coming to the classroom. They are fully prepared with the basic knowledge, ready to learn higher-level concepts and engage in fruitful discussions with the teacher and their classmates. Khan Academy, edX, Coursera, Udacity, and other MOOCs are making themselves valuable for a flipped classroom. On Bloom’s taxonomy, the students have already completed the “knowledge” and “comprehension” (and in some cases “application”) levels, and they are now prepared to develop higher-order thinking skills with “analysis”, “synthesis”, and “evaluation”.

My professors at Stanford asked us to do several things in different courses each week in addition to quarter-long team-based projects:

• Read research papers, 60 -80 pages a week.
• Form a team and work on a presentation that solves an existing problem in a novel way.
• Write a critique of each paper on a discussion forum and read and comment on at least two of other students’ critiques.
• Read one or two chapters of a book and discuss in the class.
• Prepare a short PowerPoint presentation, and upload to a forum. If picked, make a presentation to the class.
• Work as a team on an ongoing real-world project applying the concepts learned, and discuss in class.
• Write papers.

The common theme that emerges is reading research papers, writing about it, and applying the learning to real-world projects, every week, all before coming to the classroom. And sharing one’s own perspectives and participating in engaging discussions in the classroom. One of my friends at Stanford actually was not happy about spending a huge amount of money and not getting lectured by the professors. The rest of us were fine with the way we were taught though. The world’s best professors and researchers in the field of education must know better.

And it all happened because the professors had set the expectations quite high and they expected us to work hard and come to the class prepared. And we made sure we met their expextations.

Having worked in higher education for a few years now, it all started making sense when I repeatedly heard complaints from instructors that their students don’t come to the class prepared and they don’t read their books. The instructors firmly believe that their students don’t want to study so there is no point in asking them to prepare before coming to the class. I think this is a misconception.

I believe that the method employed by my professors can be used with any set of students. The instructors need to set expectations that the students have to read books, articles, or other papers and write a brief summary/analysis, do a multiple-choice quiz, or watch online videos before they come to the class. If the expectations are high, the students would aim higher.

Related readings
What Is The Flipped Classroom Model And Why Is It Amazing?
Flipping the classroom
The Flipped Classroom: Pro and Con

Are MOOCs A Disruptive Innovation?

Disruptive innovation as defined by Clayton Christensen:

“Generally, disruptive innovations were technologically straightforward, consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that was often simpler than prior approaches. They offered less of what customers in established markets wanted and so could rarely be initially employed there. They offered a different package of attributes valued only in emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream.”

Are the MOOCs a disruptive innovation that will, in the coming years, compete with and make the traditional universities obsolete? Some people certainly think so. The cost of attending college has been rising dramatically more than income, student loans are higher than credit card debt, drop-out rate is not going down, and college students are not finding jobs upon graduation. All these factors have led to many asking if a college degree is even worth spending time and money on.

If it’s education that I want, isn’t it easier and much cheaper to take courses using free MOOCs, which are putting lectures of renowned professors online, available for anyone to watch? Why spend thousands of dollars on a degree that doesn’t lead to a decent job? This is a fair question, but the answer is not straightforward.

Why MOOCs are considered disruptive
College costs are skyrocketing. Many colleges are very selective. There are limited seats available and the number of applicants is huge. Relocating to a different city to attend a traditional college has its costs too. On the other hand, MOOCs admit anyone who wants to learn. Period. They increase access to great content, and it’s free or costs a fraction of the cost of attending a traditional college. Though the dropout rate is extremely high in MOOC courses, about 90% compared to about 43% for traditional universities, the number of students graduating from a MOOC course is still very high. It is possible, at least in theory, that most of the students sit at home and learn without spending much money while the traditional colleges shut their doors because there are no students to teach. In short, MOOCs appear to solve a real problem.

MOOCs’ value proposition
The value proposition of MOOCs is access to great content for general populace and low cost. However, great or at least good, content has always been available on the Internet for free. The only thing people needed was to search the Internet. So the value of MOOCs comes from the fact that the best universities and professors are bringing the best lectures to the masses. The MOOCs are also helping instructors flip the classroom by asking students to go through the lecture before coming to the class. A hybrid course helps colleges cut costs too. A person, anywhere in the world and motivated to learn a subject or a topic, can just go online and learn without any hassle and monetary cost. It’s an incredibly convenient and inexpensive way to learn.

Is great content enough for learning?
I don’t think so. Motivation to learn is far more important than content. A highly motivated student will search and find good content on the Internet or the library. And learning is primarily a social endeavor. Learning in a classroom (even a virtual one) helps motivate students and physical proximity to other students and teacher helps encourage discussion and thinking. Learning about diverse opinions and perspectives from a group of students is a more enriching experience.

Issues with large-scale online courses:

• Requires self-motivated students
• There is hardly any accountability in the absence of grades (that the students value)
  
• The grades/credits are not accepted (yet) by most traditional colleges
• Employers do not value an online degree as much as a traditional one
• No real loss on dropping out
• No encouragement to work hard or not drop out
  
• No personalized feedback on progress (except automated grading and feedback)
• Academic dishonesty in absence of supervision
• No requirement to write long papers

Do people go to colleges only for access to great content?
Again, I don’t think so. People go to traditional colleges for a number of other factors:

• To earn a degree/credential
• Become independent
• Learn about the world
• Have a social life and enjoyment
• Have an enriching college experience
• Develop soft skills
• Discuss and learn from diverse perspectives
• Participate in sports and other extra-curricular activities
• Build personal and professional network
• Find opportunities for jobs and other interests

As long as people value these factors, the colleges will continue to thrive. And that … might just be a good thing!

Related readings
- Massive Open Online Courses — A Threat Or Opportunity To Universities?
- The Professors’ Big Stage
- The Trouble With Online College

Hyperbolic Discounting (Or Why We Make Irrational Choices)

For ages, the economists have been saying that people make rational choices to maximize their benefit. That’s how the free-market economy works.

However, in the real world, this is what happens. Students don’t study and do their homework. People keep eating more junk. People buy gym memberships but don’t go regularly. People don’t save for future. Smokers can’t quit smoking. New year resolutions are broken by a vast majority of us. We all procrastinate.

While doing my research (on Google) on why college students don’t read books or don’t do their assignments on time, I came across the term Hyperbolic Discounting. It’s a term coined by psychologists to explain the phenomenon behind a lot of our irrational decisions.

Here’s a scenario:

When offered a choice between getting $20 today or $25 a month from now, most people would take $20 today. However, if $20 is offered six months from now and $25 seven month from now, most people would take $25. In both cases, the money offered is the same and the time difference is also the same, so a rational person should choose the higher amount. But no … that’s not what numerous research studies have found.

Students know very well that they should do their assignments and study in order to get good grades, which would lead to a rewarding job and career. However, the students prefer to have fun now and postpone studies until later. They start working on their assignments when it gets really close to the deadline. So much for rationality.

Here’s the explanation for people’s irrational choices:

Ideally, $20 is $20 today, tomorrow, and a month from today. If I’m a rational person, I’d choose $25 today, tomorrow, or a month later. This is called exponential discounting, which, when represented graphically, shows a smooth exponential curve.

However, what actually happens is that I place too much value on what I’m certainly getting today or tomorrow compared with what I may or may not get later. This is called hyperbolic discounting, which shows a hyperbolic curve of how we discount the value of something over time. I prefer to have something smaller, sooner than something larger, later.
Simply explained, on Day 1, the perceived value of something is very high. On Day 2, it drops significantly, and so on. After Day 7 or 8, the perceived value remains more or less constant. It shows that we don’t place too much value on things a few days later, let alone a few years later.

This explains why students prefer to have fun today, we make ourselves feel good by eating junk today and postponing our visit to the gym, and break our resolutions. This behavior might be the result of thousands of years of evolution when our ancestors didn’t know if they would survive another day in the savannah and preferred to live in the moment.

Related readings
Overview of Hyperbolic Discounting

Why You Will Fail To Have A Great Career

Reality is bitter, but reality is true.

A great TEDx talk by Economics professor, Larry Smith.

Commitments, Not Resolutions

New year resolutions have a bad reputation of being broken. The most common resolutions are losing weight, saving more, being healthy and fit, quitting smoking, and spending more time with family. A research study shows that only 8% of Americans successfully achieve their resolutions. “New year resolution” has a negative connotation (meant to be broken), is vague, and means something too distant in the future to be seen clearly. One year is a long time. I have been guilty of making and breaking resolutions every year.
This year, I’m going to use “new year commitments” instead of “new year resolutions”. The word “commitment” seems more positive, is a promise, is near-term, and indicates something to be started immediately. Is the choice of a new word just a superficial word play? Or will it have any impact on my “resolutions”?

My new year commitments for 2013:
(Update, Jan 10: I’m already changing my commitments today. Changing is better than not achieving because Jeff Bezos said that people who were right a lot of the time were people who often changed their minds.)

1. Be a better person. To have more patience, be more forgiving, and be more loving. To keep negative feelings at bay.
2. Be a better dad. To have more patience with the kids, yell less at them , and be more accepting of their limitations because the only thing that matters in life is being a great dad.
3. Design an adaptive learning product for school children to learn science and math. Science and math, usually taught in abstract terms, can be difficult to understand. Using examples from the real world and framing questions around them and taking into consideration the kids’ existing knowledge and misconceptions, it is possible to help the kids understand concepts effectively.
4. Focus more, procrastinate less. At home or in the office, create to-do lists for each day, and act on the tasks.
5. Run 1,000 600 miles. On the treadmill and road. Complete the flying pig half marathon in May 2013 under 2:15 hours. (Added on 1/10/13) Lose most of body fat and gain lean muscle.
   
6. Learn something new. Not finalized yet, but php programming, may be.

Related readings
– Just 8% of People Achieve Their New Year’s Resolutions. Here’s How They Do It
– Google has already charted the failure of your New Year’s resolutions

Reading List – 2012

My target was to read 50 books in 2012. I actually read only 37.

1. Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation by Tim Brown
2. The Geeks Shall Inherit the Earth: Popularity, Quirk Theory, and Why Outsiders Thrive After High School by Alexandra Robbins
3. The Laws of Simplicity (Simplicity: Design, Technology, Business, Life) by John Maeda
4. The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement, and Creativity at Work by Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer
5. Brilliant, Crazy, Cocky: How the Top 1% of Entrepreneurs Profit from Global Chaos by Sarah Lacy
6. The End of Illness by David B. Agus
7. Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren’t the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room Is the Room by David Weinberger
8. Enchantment: The Art of Changing Hearts, Minds, and Actions by Guy Kawasaki
9. The Little Black Book of Innovation: How It Works, How to Do It by Scott D. Anthony
10. Change.edu: Rebooting for the New Talent Economy by Andrew Rosen
11. Design Is How It Works: How the Smartest Companies Turn Products into Icons by Jay Green
12. Unleashing the Killer App: Digital Strategies for Market Dominance by Larry Downes and Chunka Mui
13. Whoever Tells the Best Story Wins: How to Use Your Own Stories to Communicate with Power and Impact by Annette Simmons
14. Imagine: How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer
15. Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World by Jane McGonigal
16. The Art of Possibility: Transforming Professional and Personal Life by Rosamund Stone Zander and Benjamin Zander
17. This is a Book by Demetri Martin
18. The War of Art: Break Through the Blocks and Win Your Inner Creative Battles by Steven Pressfield and Shawn Coyne
19. Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change the World by Tony Wagner
20. The 100 Best Business Books of All Time: What They Say, Why They Matter, and How They Can Help You by Jack Covert and Todd Sattersten
21. The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character, and Achievement by David Brooks
22. 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People by Susan Weinschenk
23. 10 Pounds in 10 Days by Jackie Warner
24. The Hummer and the Mini: Navigating the Contradictions of the New Trend Landscape by Robyn Waters
25. Orbiting the Giant Hairball: A Corporate Fool’s Guide to Surviving with Grace by Gordon MacKenzie
26. Differentiate or Die by Jack Trout
27. Abraham Lincoln by James M. McPherson
28. How Will You Measure Your Life? by Clayton M. Christensen
29. The Monk and the Riddle: The Art of Creating a Life While Making a Living by Randy Komisar
30. Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn by Cathy N. Davidson
31. In Pursuit of the Unknown: 17 Equations That Changed the World by Ian Stewart
32. The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business by Charles Duhigg
33. How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character by Paul Tough
34. You Are Not So Smart by David McRaney
35. Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind by Al Ries and Jack Trout
36. All Marketers Are Liars by Seth Godin
37. The Apple Experience: Secrets to Building Insanely Great Customer Loyalty by Carmine Gallo

Reading List – 2011

Is MOOC Solving The Wrong Problem?

In 2011, Sebastian Thrun, a research professor at Stanford University, and his colleague at Google, Peter Norvig, put their course on Artificial Intelligence online. Soon, 160,000 people from 190 countries enrolled in their online course. The number of students who enrolled in this course at Stanford? 300. Encouraged by the massive scale of this endeavor, they started a company, Udacity, to provide online courses on computer science topics.

Around the same time, many other people and universities were looking at this opportunity and taking steps to lead and participate in what many call an online learning revolution. Coursera, Udacity, edX, and Venture Lab are just a few of the high profile Massive Online Open Courseware (MOOC) providers. Thousands of people of all ages from every part of the world enroll in the courses provided by these for-profit and not-for-profit online organizations.

The basic assumption seems to be the following:

1. Universities accept only a limited number of students, but with an online course, there is no limit to the number of students who can be served high quality courses.
2. Students (or people of all ages) want to learn new subjects, and they don’t have to pay any money to take the courses offered free online.
3. The cost of producing these courses is minimal as the lectures in physical classrooms can be recorded and put online for everyone to see.
4. People can improve their skill by taking these courses, which is going to help them in their careers or hobbies.
5. The courses are free so students will flock to these companies, and nobody will buy books or enroll in colleges and universities because they are too expensive.
6. The newly launched companies will find a business model later to make money.

I believe the MOOCs serve a purpose. They certainly help people who do not have or want to spend money to enroll in college courses. Or simply do not have access to these courses in their colleges or countries. I’m one of them. I learn new things on the Internet without spending any money. But my problem is not access to quality content. The Internet is full of high-quality and free content on virtually any topic under the sun. My problem is perseverance, motivation, and time. Exactly the same problems thousands of students face who enroll in physical universities. The US has a very high college enrollment rate (8th among 34 OECD countries) but an extremely high dropout rate too (33rd). The main issue is not access to quality content. One of the main issues is money. Even if that is taken care of, an online course is a lonely place to be, without a teacher or a friend to guide, socialize with, or provide motivation and encouragement.

From the article Size Isn’t Everything in The Chronicle of Higher Education:
“Making courseware “massive” may dangle the eventual possibility of trillion-dollar profits (even if they have yet to materialize). But it does not “fix” what is broken in our system of education. It massively scales what’s broken.”

I tried to learn JavaScript on Codecademy and took a course on creativity on Stanford University’s Venture Lab. I dropped out in both courses despite a high level of interest in both topics. And most of the people enrolling in MOOCs are doing the same. The course completion rates are less than 10% despite a much lesser demand on one’s time and resources. The main problem, I believe, is that of relevance and motivation.

Suggested readings
- MOOCs
- The Online Pecking Order
- Playing the Role of MOOC Skeptic: 7 Concerns
- MOOC Skepticism Persists Among University Presidents, Despite Rapid Growth Of Online Courses In 2012