$30 off During Our Annual Pro Sale. View Details »

Soup to Nuts: My Approach to IBL

Dana Ernst
August 05, 2014

Soup to Nuts: My Approach to IBL

These slides accompanied a plenary talk I gave as part of the 2014 IBL Workshop that took place in Portland, OR. The slides are meant to be a summary to my approach to IBL.

Dana Ernst

August 05, 2014
Tweet

More Decks by Dana Ernst

Other Decks in Education

Transcript

  1. Soup to Nuts: My
    Approach to IBL
    IBL Workshop 2014
    Portland, OR
    Dana C. Ernst
    Northern Arizona University
    Web: http://danaernst.com

    View Slide

  2. About Me
    • Assistant professor at Northern Arizona
    University
    • PhD from University of Colorado (2008)
    • Project NExT Red08
    • Special Projects Coordinator for
    Academy of Inquiry-Based Learning
    • MAA blogger at Math Ed Matters with
    Angie Hodge
    • Spent 4 years at Plymouth State
    University prior to NAU
    It may be the most recent addition
    to MAA’s blog offerings, but Math
    Ed Matters already has a varied
    backlog of informative, entertain-
    ing, and inspiring posts—and a
    lively comments section. Launched
    on April 10, 2013, Math Ed Matters
    showcases the irregular but more-
    than-monthly musings of Angie
    Hodge (University of Nebraska,
    Omaha) and Dana Ernst (Northern
    Arizona University) on topics and
    current events related to undergrad-
    uate mathematics and mathematics
    education.
    Hodge and Ernst have a lot in
    common. They’re both Project
    NExT fellows. (They met at a Project
    NExT ice cream social in 2008.)
    They both regularly undertake feats
    of physicality the less fit among us
    cannot begin to fathom: They run
    ultramarathons and scale sheer rock
    faces and accomplish thousands of
    feet of elevation gain under their
    own power. The pair also shares
    interest in and engagement with
    inquiry-based learning (IBL), and
    their belief in the efficacy of IBL
    colors the content of their blog.
    Within its first few months, Math
    Ed Matters treated readers to a
    video of Angie’s students doing
    a calculus version of the Korean
    pop hit “Gangnam Style”; Dana’s
    meditations on how instructors’
    personalities influence their choice
    of teaching methods; and reflections
    on MAA MathFest 2013 and the
    16th Annual Legacy of R. L. Moore
    Conference. Hodge and Ernst also
    provided, for the uninitiated, an
    inquiry-based learning primer titled
    “What the Heck Is IBL?”
    An Eager Audience
    Even as it spreads the word about
    IBL, Math Ed Matters has found a
    ready-made following in the com-
    munity of mathematics educators
    already implementing the student-
    centered pedagogy in their class-
    rooms. An August post about Ernst’s
    success giving his students colored
    pens to annotate their homework
    as classmates present solutions at
    the board spurred a discussion in
    the comments section. As read-
    ers requested clarification, voiced
    concerns, and offered suggestions
    of their own, Ernst periodically
    interjected.
    Ernst and Hodge have big plans
    for Math Ed Matters. In the coming
    months they expect to tackle online
    LaTeX editors, the University of Ne-
    braska, Omaha’s Calculus Bee, and a
    University of Colorado study of IBL
    effectiveness. They’ll also offer their
    perspectives on how to choose stu-
    dent presenters and secure student
    buy-in.
    “We are thrilled to be part of the
    discussion about improving teach-
    ing and the importance of math-
    ematics in education,” says Ernst.
    “Come on over [to the blog] and
    share your thoughts.”
    Angie Hodge (left) and Dana Ernst.
    http://maamathedmatters.
    blogspot.com/
    0$$)2&86v'HFHPEHU-DQXDU\vPDDRUJSXEVIRFXVKWPO
    Nice socks!

    View Slide

  3. My IBL History
    • Number of IBL classes as student: 0
    • When I started teaching, I mimicked experiences I had as a
    student (I lectured).
    • By most metrics, I was an excellent instructor. But:
    • First exposed to IBL/Moore Method during a Project NExT
    workshop run by Carol Schumacher.
    • Taught 1st full-blown IBL class in Fall 2009.
    • Attended IBL Workshop during Summer 2010.
    “Things my students claim that I taught them
    masterfully, they don’t know.” -- Dylan Retsek

    View Slide

  4. • For 3 consecutive semesters, I taught an intro to proof
    course at Plymouth State University.
    • 1st two iterations taught via lecture-based approach.
    • 3rd time taught using IBL.
    • When I taught an abstract algebra course containing
    students from both styles, I was convinced that students
    taught via IBL were stronger proof-writers & more
    independent as learners.
    • And finally I saw the potential for transformative change.
    My First IBL Class
    “We’re in the business of changing lives.”
    -- Mike Starbird

    View Slide

  5. What is IBL?
    • Key ingredients: Students are responsible for
    ‣ guiding acquisition of knowledge, &
    ‣ validating ideas/arguments that are presented.
    • Student presentations and group work do not imply IBL.
    Personal Obstacles
    • If I lecture, then I dictate pace.
    • If I write something on the board, then there is a good
    chance that it will be done correctly.
    • Keeping my mouth shut is hard.
    Control!

    View Slide

  6. Continually ask yourself the following question:
    Guiding Principle of IBL
    Where do I draw the line
    between content I must impart
    to my students versus content
    they can produce independently?

    View Slide

  7. A Modified-Moore Method

    View Slide

  8. • When I first started using IBL, grading/assessing students
    caused me the most anxiety.
    ‣ Desire for data to justify letter grade
    ‣ Grading written work is extremely time-consuming (for
    me)
    ‣ Desire for feedback to be useful
    • After some trial and error, I’ve settled on an approach that
    works great for me.
    Comments

    View Slide

  9. • Produce examples/counterexamples
    • Validate arguments
    • Make conjectures
    • Produce valid proofs
    • Learn to write
    • Develop perseverance
    • Develop independence
    Goals
    Category Weight Notes
    Homework 25% Mix of Daily & Weekly Homework
    Presentations & Participation 30% Students present problems from Daily Homework
    3 Exams 45% Mix of take-home and in-class exams
    Grade Determination

    View Slide

  10. Problem Sequence
    • Started by using others’ notes/book, but now prefer to
    write my own.
    • Source of notes available on GitHub:
    http://github.com/dcernst/IBL-IntroToProof
    Rules of the Game
    • Students should not look to outside resources
    • Internet, other texts, other faculty, math major cousins,
    etc. are forbidden.
    • On the other hand, students are encouraged to collaborate
    on homework & even take-home exams.

    View Slide

  11. • 5-10 “tasks” assigned each class meeting (Daily HW). Due
    next class.
    • Students responsible for digesting new material out of
    class.
    • Nearly all class time devoted to students presenting
    proposed solutions/proofs to Daily HW.
    • My job:
    ‣ William Wallace meets Robin Williams
    ‣ Facilitate/manage
    ‣ Mr. Super Positive
    • Students may request mini-lectures or screencasts.
    • Students type up subset of problems from previous week
    (Weekly HW).
    Day-to-Day Operation
    Hang on
    every word.

    View Slide

  12. Student Presentations
    • One student at a time talking & writing.
    • Must present at least 2x prior to each exam in order to
    receive a passing grade for Presentation category.
    • I take notes during presentation & add to spreadsheet.
    • Presentations are serious business, not meant to be formal
    Grade Criteria
    4 Completely correct and clear proof or solution. Yay!
    3 Solution/Proof has minor technical flaws or is lacking some details.
    2 A partial explanation or proof is provided but a significant gap still exists.
    1 Minimal progress has been made.

    View Slide

  13. Daily Homework
    • Problems from task sequence are assigned based on where
    we ended previous class.
    • Colored pens!!!
    ‣ Each student grabs a colored pen
    on way into class.
    ‣ Students use pens to annotate HW
    in light of presentation & related
    discussion.
    ‣ No penalty for use of pen.
    • Graded on ✔-system. What did they have done before
    class?

    View Slide

  14. Advantages of Colored Pens
    • I know what happened before class versus during class.
    • Students have (mostly) correct work by the end of class
    (pedantic details & logical structure).
    • Students have a record of what happened in class together
    with their HW.
    • When students look back at their notes they see their
    comments about what they were thinking & they see
    corrected mistakes.
    • Grading of the Daily HW is fast!
    Important!
    Mode of engagement is different when listening to expert vs.
    novice.

    View Slide

  15. Weekly Homework
    • On week n+1, students choose 2 *-problems from Daily HW
    from week n.
    • Proofs typed (LaTeX, check out writeLaTeX).
    • Submit PDF on non-class (Canvas).
    • Students forced to reflect on previous week’s work by
    reviewing their notes from Daily HW.
    • Graded harshly on 1-4 scale (Ted Mahavier):
    Grade Criteria
    4 This is correct and well-written mathematics!
    3
    This is a good piece of work, yet there are some mathematical errors or
    some writing errors that need addressing.
    2 There is some good intuition here, but there is at least one serious flaw.
    1 I don't understand this, but I see that you have worked on it.

    View Slide

  16. Optimization problem!
    Useful feedback
    for students
    Data to support
    grades
    Time required

    View Slide

  17. An IBL Lite Approach

    View Slide

  18. • Calculus sequence. A work in progress for me.
    • 30-45 students.
    • 4 midterm exams & a cumulative final.
    • 3-4 Daily HW assignments per week (WeBWorK).
    • 1 Weekly HW assignment per week. Covers main topics
    from previous week. More challenging than Daily HW.
    • 3 class meetings devoted to introducing new material,
    either via lecture or exploratory group work.
    • 1 class meeting devoted to students presenting problems
    from Weekly HW. Students annotate with colored pens.
    • Presentation day looks like last Starbird video.
    • Presenters are not graded, but 5-10% of grade is for
    participation.
    My Approach to IBL-Lite

    View Slide

  19. • Effective marketing
    • Return to your guiding principle
    • Adjusting problems/tasks appropriately
    • Patience & trust!
    • Community
    • Build on positive experiences
    • Pick a style that you are comfortable with
    • Adapt, overcome, & improvise
    Keys to Success

    View Slide