Editorial: Professors should think before ‘flipping’ classrooms

Have you ever been in a flipped classroom? Have you ever been in a flipped classroom?

We don’t mean in an “Alice in Wonderland,” up-is-down-and-down-is-up way — we mean the new technique that’s a hot topic of discussion among professors.

The idea is that “flipping” the classroom shifts the focus from professor to student. It forces students to work together in groups while monitored or guided by a professor. Supposedly, it allows students to forgo their passive-learning tendencies and tap into their critical-thinking skills.

If done effectively, flipping a classroom could correct misunderstandings immediately and give students more than one way to think about a concept or solve a problem.

But that’s a big “if.”

In trying to flip a class of, say, 200 students, a professor would never be able to give the right amount of attention to each student. But assuming he could — with the help of several teaching assistants — we still think a lot must fall into place before a flipped classroom could be conducive to learning.

Consider this: A recitation — mandatory or optional — is usually assigned with these bigger classes, and that’s where students can convene in small groups to go over material. For most, the small meeting isn’t where the actual learning process takes place, but it works to supplement the material in a way similar to the flipped-classroom model.

But assuming that a classroom does not have a recitation, let’s consider what steps a professor would have to take to make sure this learning process would help, not hinder, his students.

The class subject must be theory — or application-based. We don’t think this method of teaching could be too helpful in massive introductory courses that primarily study core information that involves little critical thinking.

A better outlet for classroom-flipping would be a subject like philosophy, where thinking through — and criticizing — texts is integral to the application of the subject matter. Therefore, upper-level courses could benefit from students working through ideas together.

The professor must serve as facilitator. It would take a keen instructor with a fair amount of experience to make this work. He would need a solid understanding of what academic level his students are coming in at and if they would respond favorably to group activity.

He would also need to acknowledge that sometimes he is not the authority on the issue, and his beliefs and leanings could hinder the flow of information in the classroom. Self-awareness and the ability to answer questions quickly are integral to this class format.

Finally, the students in a flipped class must be comfortable with subject matter and open to experimentation. It’s likely that the student who falls asleep in the back of the classroom wouldn’t exactly be thrilled with this amount of group work.

Making sure that these are upper-level students and clearing the idea with them first would prevent poor professor ratings and student absences. Students eager to learn and discuss ideas are key to integrating this classroom format.

We see the potential of flipping the classroom: It increases communication skills and could produce students who are familiar with small-group collaboration, a skill essential for success in the workplace.

It could be an effective way to enhance learning, especially at large research institutions like Pitt.

But professors should think before they flip.