FLIPPED CLASSROOM AS LEARNERS’ AUTONOMY IN DEBATE COURSE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2015.s21.4456Keywords:
Flipped Classroom, Learners’ Autonomy, DebateAbstract
A debate course is speaking class focusing on how students deliver their opinion on certain topics. The class is designed as a true debate competition. The challenges come when many topics need to be discussed. The teacher used a flipped classroom. It is a new pedagogical method employing a synchronous video lectures and practice problems as homework, and active, group based problems solving activities in the classroom. It represents a unique combination of learning. The steps for applying flipped classroom were: 1) The teacher divides students into 2 groups, affirmative and negative; 2) The teacher gives a certain topic to the groups; 3) the teacher asks the students to find articles related to the topic; 4) The teacher asks students to make a case building based on the topic. In conclusion, Students got benefits from the process of flipped classroom such as: 1) Students moved at their own pace; 2) Students did homework in different way; 3) Students got time to practice; 4) Students can use technology to support their learning; 5) Students force to learn inside and outside the class; 6) Students got their prior knowledge before coming to the class
References
Anderson, (2001). What the Best College Teachers Do, Harvard University Press, 32-42.
Benson. S. (2001). Third generation educational use of flipped classroom, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 263-281
Dickson, (1987). Teaching At Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors, 2nd edition, Anker Publishing, 41-44.
Donal DeLong, (2002). Learning to Teaching and Teaching to Learn Mathematics: Resources for Professional Development, Mathematical Association of America, 159-168.
Embretson, S.E. (1987). Improving the measurement of spatial aptitude by dynamic testing. Intelligence 11(4), 333-358
Faltis,O. (1993). Conflicts and catastrophes in the learning of english, English Education for teaching, 24, 2 – 18
Forsyth, D.R. & McMillan, J.H. (1991). What teories of motivation say about why learners learn. New directions for teaching and learning. 45: 39-51
Fulton, K. (2012). Educational design: Experiental flipped classroom model revisited. Research Report 4. Tampere University of Technology. Retrieved from
http://amc.pori.tut.fi/publications/EducationalGameDesign.pdf
Gardner, H. (1991). Abschied vom IQ-Die Rahmentheorie der vielfache Intelligenzen. Stuttgart, (Orig.: Frames of mind)
Groff, J., Howells, C., & Cranmer, S. (2010). The impact of console flipped in the classroom: Evidence from schools in Scotland. UK: Futurelab
Hays, R.T. (2005). The effectiveness of instructional flipped classroom: A literature review and discussion. Orlando, FL: naval Air Warfare Center Training Division. Retrieved from
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetRDoc?AD=ADA441935
Hundelson & Heald, Y. (1993). Report on the educational use of flipped classroom: An exploration by TEEM of the contribution which flipped can make to the education process. Cambridgeshire, UK
Malone, T.W. (1981). Toward a theory of instrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 5(4), 333-369
Pemberton. (1996). Evaluation of a game-based performance task for measuring collaborative problem solving skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Scrivener, J. (2005). 21st century skills and serious flipped classroom: Preparing the N generation. In L.A. Annetta (Ed), Serious educational games (pp. 13-23). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishing
Spires, H.A., et al. (2011). Problem solving learning: Effect of middle grade students’ hypothesis testing strategies on learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(4), 452-472
Thurstone, L.L. (1950). Some primary abilities in visual thinking. Psychometric laboratory research report no. 59, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Webb, N.L/ (1997). Criteria for Alignment of Expectations and Assessments in Social Education. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers
Wise, S. L., & DeMars, C. E. (2003). Examinee motivation in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Higher Education Assessment Conference. Retrieved from
http://www.jmu.edu/assessment/wm_library/Examinee_Motivation.pdf
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
