9. Interview with Joe Redish about Dickinson Layout and “Science thinking”

10. MIT Physics Department

11. Artist’s Impression

12. Technology Enabled Active Learning Classroom Whiteboards fill the walls. Seats 117 undergraduate students

13. Teal 7metre table for 9 people and 3 connection areas for laptops, equipment and PRS

14. Lecturn for academic – several projectors and a document scanner for small demos. Also note the mics for students responding to questions

15. One data projector per screen. Movie cameras for each whiteboard seems like overkill (one graphics card and data projectors could have sufficed)

16. Personal response systems – used judiciously to procure student feedback. Results displayed on the screen within seconds of everyone answering.

17. Wheels on chairs ensure easy free movement

18. Whiteboards for staff and student use Note: switch activates movie camera

19. Lighting and carpet create “lounge room” ambience

20. Sufficient table spacing to minimise noise from neighbouring groups

21. Foyer with pics of the exciting labs that take place

22. Prep room for 1 st year

23. All 1 st year labs use small portable equipment

24. Compare Teal with boring lecture hall where attendance is now a real problem

25. TEAL: Studio Physics Technology-Enabled Active LearningTechnology-Enabled Active Learning John Belcher Interview

26. TEAL – Technology-Enabled Active Learning  A merger of lecture, recitations, and hands-on laboratory experience into a technologically and collaboratively rich environment MIT students interviewed

27. Instructors mentor group experiment and discussion

28. Main Study: Pre vs. Post Conceptual Test Scores Main Study: Pre vs. Post Conceptual Test Scores For the experimental group, the correlation between the conceptual pre-test scores with students’ final course scores was 0.34 (p < 0.0001). N = 121 Experimental group II - Fall 2001Control group II - Spring 2002 N = 176

30. Princeton Physics Department

31. Wooden sliding door leads to ancillary classroom used for pre and post lab sessions

32. Ancillary classroom with blackboard for use by students and TAs

33. University of California Davis

34. Undergrad labs are run together with tutorials as 2 x 2.5hr discussion labs supplemented with 1hr of lecture time. Interview with Wendell Potter about groups of 5

35. 5-6 groups of 5 students collaborate on the exercises. Each group has one blackboard and one experimental setup. Groups are self selecting on the whole.

36. There are discussions amongst the groups of 5 before and after the hands on exercises. The class is run by a TA who calls together the class as a whole for discussion at key points. The class has a maximum of 25-35 students.

37. The constant hub of activity and discussion is testament to the fact that students find it an engaging experience. Interview re gender differences

38. Note configuration of tables. Hexagonal collaboration area and rectangular area for equipment. Tables made from old doors in workshop.

39. Similar arrangement in another freshman lab Note one whiteboard per table

40. Traditional table set up in sophomore lab, no obvious educational vision that ties first year and later years together. Lab directors seem to work fairly independently, probably to maintain harmonious relationship.

41. Summary MIT and UC Davis have custom designed their labs to enable a certain flexible teaching style to be implemented that combines elements of lectures, tuts and traditional labs in a collaborative setting. Compare with Berkeley who are planning folding walls, movable tables etc but have made no firm commitment to any direction in pedagogy. Which model is preferable?