"Flipped classrooms" and video lectures at U of Vermont: would you attend?

[timephone]

U of Vermont medical school to get rid of all lecture courses

Was looking up info about UVM and came across this article. I'll probably still apply here next year, but with this info I'd think twice before choosing it over a more traditional program.

How do you fellow premeds feel about eliminating lectures and replacing them with group sessions? I think that I personally respond better to attending lectures. I like to pre-read, and then listen to the professor explain things (as long as he/she is focused on the lesson and is generally a good teacher). This gives me multiple "angles" from which to derive an understanding of a topic. I do also enjoy group discussion sections, and feel it gives students the opportunity to teach the material, which reinforces understanding. But attending lecture is helpful for me, much more engaging than having to watch a recorded video lecture... Having both options would obviously be ideal, but not realistic 100% of the time.

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[F1rstGen]

U of Vermont medical school to get rid of all lecture courses

Was looking up info about UVM and came across this article. I'll probably still apply here next year, but with this info I'd think twice before choosing it over a more traditional program.

How do you fellow premeds feel about eliminating lectures and replacing them with group sessions? I think that I personally respond better to attending lectures. I like to pre-read, and then listen to the professor explain things (as long as he/she is focused on the lesson and is generally a good teacher). This gives me multiple "angles" from which to derive an understanding of a topic. I do also enjoy group discussion sections, and feel it gives students the opportunity to teach the material, which reinforces understanding. But attending lecture is helpful for me, much more engaging than having to watch a recorded video lecture... Having both options would obviously be ideal, but not realistic 100% of the time.

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

Our school had several "flipped sessions" they ranged from helpful to a complete waste of our time based on how it was structured and who was leading the session. Having experienced the flipped classroom model in several different forms, I'm a strong believer that didactic lectures (with lecturers that are actually engaging) mixed with some class polling questions (clicker/multiple choice) are still the best way to teach the first two years of medical school.

 

[teenyfish]

I'd be interested to try it. For me, listening to a professor is so passive, I'd much rather be having active discussions and working with the material than just listening. We'll see how it goes though, but I'm happy that a school is making an effort to change up their teaching style to reflect how people learn now vs. decades ago.

 

[doctorleospaceman]

No thanks. Flipped classroom style means you'll be stuck on one topic the whole mandatory class time and then be forced to learn everything else completely on your own at home.

Also if I was paying UVM's ridiculous tuition I'd expect to be taught by professors not my classmates.

 

[The Walking Debt]

U of Vermont medical school to get rid of all lecture courses

Was looking up info about UVM and came across this article. I'll probably still apply here next year, but with this info I'd think twice before choosing it over a more traditional program.

How do you fellow premeds feel about eliminating lectures and replacing them with group sessions? I think that I personally respond better to attending lectures. I like to pre-read, and then listen to the professor explain things (as long as he/she is focused on the lesson and is generally a good teacher). This gives me multiple "angles" from which to derive an understanding of a topic. I do also enjoy group discussion sections, and feel it gives students the opportunity to teach the material, which reinforces understanding. But attending lecture is helpful for me, much more engaging than having to watch a recorded video lecture... Having both options would obviously be ideal, but not realistic 100% of the time.

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

I'd much rather listen to a lecture. From my experience, group sessions tend to get sidetracked very easily without getting much done.

 

[LizzyM]

Do keep in mind that you can listen to lectures on your own time. You can listen at a faster speed. You can listen more than once. You can rewind and replay. You can listen in your PJs. You are preparing for the instruction that will take place in the classroom.

Now that you've listened to the lecture on acid/base, the small group led by a faculty member is going to introduce you to a case including the symptoms and lab values that the patient presents with. What is wrong? Most of the group thinks that it is acidosis. How do you know? What evidence is there to make that statement? Is it metabolic or respiratory acidosis? How do you know? What is the likely cause of this in this patient? What are other causes of metabolic acidosis? What can/should be done to treat him? What should that accomplish? etc.

There are good and poor ways to do small group learning. Ask how faculty are being prepared for this role and what kind of training the course directors have had in adult learning.

 

[theonlytycrane]

Some classmates would be awesome to learn with / from. Others might not be as enjoyable / prepared / engaged. I prefer traditional & optional lectures.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[LizzyM]

Some classmates would be awesome to learn with / from. Others might not be as enjoyable / prepared / engaged. I prefer traditional & optional lectures.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

Would you change your mind if students were assessed on their performance in small groups? Do you think that assessment of small group participation would change the behavior of students who might be otherwise unprepared and/or unengaged?

 

[morejedi]

I took an undergraduate genetics course that was taught as a flip classroom (the first of it's kind at my undergrad). Honestly I loved the ability to watch lectures at my own pace at home and then attend class to do practice problems with the professor.

The issue was - the classroom was a 500 person lecture so we just did practice problems and weren't really given much time/opportunity to discuss with our peers or even our professor because of the class size. Any discussion was meant to be had during our sections outside of lecture (which I'll admit were beneficial).

Ultimately I loved the teaching style. It gives you more control of your learning and time. However, it definitely becomes a problem when/if you skip the in-class portion if you're the kind of person who gets lazy and attempts to get by through just watching lectures. I had a friend who did this and he ended up with a grade that was below his level of aptitude.

 

[blackroses]

Would you change your mind if students were assessed on their performance in small groups? Do you think that assessment of small group participation would change the behavior of students who might be otherwise unprepared and/or unengaged?

I struggle with this because I have not seen an assessment system (for engagement in a small group) that I think works particularly well. Two different tactics are typically used: 1. have students evaluate their peers, and 2. the instructor evaluates for performance during the presentation.

The issue with the first is that it's an unspoken rule that unless you want everyone in the group (or class) to turn against you, you give everyone high evaluations and they do the same for you. If you start giving low evaluations, you start getting them in return, whether or not you deserve them. I've seen this happen to the hardest working person in a group who ended up with a terrible performance grade.

The issue with the second is that when an instructor only evaluates how students perform during the presentation, it's very easy for a student to contribute absolutely nothing to the project at hand then stand up and word-vomit what they heard everyone else say about their topic, earning a perfect score for contributing absolutely nothing.

I'd need to see a revision of typically assessment strategies to be convinced that it would contribute to reducing the number of "free-loading" students.

 

[LizzyM]

I struggle with this because I have not seen an assessment system (for engagement in a small group) that I think works particularly well. Two different tactics are typically used: 1. have students evaluate their peers, and 2. the instructor evaluates for performance during the presentation.

The issue with the first is that it's an unspoken rule that unless you want everyone in the group (or class) to turn against you, you give everyone high evaluations and they do the same for you. If you start giving low evaluations, you start getting them in return, whether or not you deserve them. I've seen this happen to the hardest working person in a group who ended up with a terrible performance grade.

The issue with the second is that when an instructor only evaluates how students perform during the presentation, it's very easy for a student to contribute absolutely nothing to the project at hand then stand up and word-vomit what they heard everyone else say about their topic, earning a perfect score for contributing absolutely nothing.

I'd need to see a revision of typically assessment strategies to be convinced that it would contribute to reducing the number of "free-loading" students.

From what I've seen, students are evaluated using a rubric on multiple competency standards. The faculty member is asked to provide positive observations, suggestions for improvement and general comments. Some of the competencies are: effective communication and interpersonal skills (active listening, demonstrates understanding through summary and clarification), accountability and dependability (professionalism), Shares information clearly with faculty and peers, uses appropriate reference materials, etc.

I've been in some small group situations where each student independently prepares a talk on a specific, unique learning issue and there is no where to hide if you have not done your part. Another strategy is to have all of the members of the group take a quiz independently, then share answers and agree on an answer as a group. the answer is then revealed to the group. (There can be numerous groups working with one instructor in this situation.)

 

[blackroses]

From what I've seen, students are evaluated using a rubric on multiple competency standards. The faculty member is asked to provide positive observations, suggestions for improvement and general comments. Some of the competencies are: effective communication and interpersonal skills (active listening, demonstrates understanding through summary and clarification), accountability and dependability (professionalism), Shares information clearly with faculty and peers, uses appropriate reference materials, etc.

I've been in some small group situations where each student independently prepares a talk on a specific, unique learning issue and there is no where to hide if you have not done your part. Another strategy is to have all of the members of the group take a quiz independently, then share answers and agree on an answer as a group. the answer is then revealed to the group. (There can be numerous groups working with one instructor in this situation.)

I can't say I've ever seen the first method. I do have a few reservations, as it seems quite difficult for an instructor to accurately assess everyone on all of these points when working with more than 3 or so groups at a time. I do like the second idea, with students each presenting their own case. It seems to essentially involve students doing independent work though, so I don't necessarily understand how it would be incorporated into small group work. As for the last method, that was a favorite of my professors who tried to do the small group work. There was invariably some freeloader who contributed nothing throughout the discussion in nearly every group.

 

[F1rstGen]

Do keep in mind that you can listen to lectures on your own time. You can listen at a faster speed. You can listen more than once. You can rewind and replay. You can listen in your PJs. You are preparing for the instruction that will take place in the classroom.

Now that you've listened to the lecture on acid/base, the small group led by a faculty member is going to introduce you to a case including the symptoms and lab values that the patient presents with. What is wrong? Most of the group thinks that it is acidosis. How do you know? What evidence is there to make that statement? Is it metabolic or respiratory acidosis? How do you know? What is the likely cause of this in this patient? What are other causes of metabolic acidosis? What can/should be done to treat him? What should that accomplish? etc.

There are good and poor ways to do small group learning. Ask how faculty are being prepared for this role and what kind of training the course directors have had in adult learning.

My school had a few courses that used this format and it was universally loathed. With traditional didactics you usually have ~4hrs of lecture per day then the rest of the day for independent study or to review the recorded lecture. With the group set up, you are in class for doing inefficient group work for ~4hrs/day but then are forced to spend the evening watching lectures and preparing for the next day. You get very little time to focus on your own knowledge gaps and cement past topics. I found myself studying relentlessly during the weekends in these courses and constantly felt like I was falling behind.

 

[F1rstGen]

Dr. Sattar's brillance that is Pathoma is a perfect example that didactic lectures can be an incredibly effective and efficient way to learn medicine, you just have to have lecturers that aren't a complete snooze fest. To me, group based learning or "student driven learning" is taking the easy way out for an administration. It's much harder to try and improve the instruction of your faculty or recruit lecturers that the students actually enjoy.

 

[LizzyM]

I can't say I've ever seen the first method. I do have a few reservations, as it seems quite difficult for an instructor to accurately assess everyone on all of these points when working with more than 3 or so groups at a time. I do like the second idea, with students each presenting their own case. It seems to essentially involve students doing independent work though, so I don't necessarily understand how it would be incorporated into small group work. As for the last method, that was a favorite of my professors who tried to do the small group work. There was invariably some freeloader who contributed nothing throughout the discussion in nearly every group.

The first is typical when a faculty member is responsible for 6-9 students.

With students presenting their "learning issue" from a set of knowledge gaps identified by the small group in the previous class session, the students learn from one another in active listening to the presentations. In some cases, students are asked to anonymously assess their classmates so people who coast and do poorly are called out. If there is an ongoing problem, it is easily seen by the person (faculty member) who does a portfolio review and the student can be counseled on strategies for improvement.

 

[Lawpy]

I'm struggling to understand why medical school deans are so invested in constantly changing preclinical curricula when preclinical grades matter very little for residency purposes. What's wrong with just sticking with unranked pass/fail grading + optional lectures + some required PBL sessions? Why complicate things and bring unnecessary headache and stress for students?

 

[LizzyM]

I'm struggling to understand why medical school deans are so invested in constantly changing preclinical curricula when preclinical grades matter very little for residency purposes. What's wrong with just sticking with unranked pass/fail grading + optional lectures + some required PBL sessions? Why complicate things and bring unnecessary headache and stress for students?

Because even in a unranked pass/fail curriculum, there needs to be some assessment of student learning, feedback to the student and recommendations for the student's continued growth and development.

And the answer to every question that begins with "why are medical school deans so invested in..." is "LCEM requires..." The accrediting agency always calls the tune.

 

[Lawpy]

Because even in a unranked pass/fail curriculum, there needs to be some assessment of student learning, feedback to the student and recommendations for the student's continued growth and development.

And the answer to every question that begins with "why are medical school deans so invested in..." is "LCEM requires..." The accrediting agency always calls the tune.

But these are all covered by PBL sessions and class exams.

 

[Mad Jack]

U of Vermont medical school to get rid of all lecture courses

Was looking up info about UVM and came across this article. I'll probably still apply here next year, but with this info I'd think twice before choosing it over a more traditional program.

How do you fellow premeds feel about eliminating lectures and replacing them with group sessions? I think that I personally respond better to attending lectures. I like to pre-read, and then listen to the professor explain things (as long as he/she is focused on the lesson and is generally a good teacher). This gives me multiple "angles" from which to derive an understanding of a topic. I do also enjoy group discussion sections, and feel it gives students the opportunity to teach the material, which reinforces understanding. But attending lecture is helpful for me, much more engaging than having to watch a recorded video lecture... Having both options would obviously be ideal, but not realistic 100% of the time.

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

This has kind of been going on for years, it's called CBL. People do fine with it, and, on average, have higher board scores than before CBL curriculums are implemented. Lecture is largely a waste of time, you learn more by hitting books and doing questions for an hour than you would in a whole 8 hour day of lecture.

 

[Goro]

U of Vermont medical school to get rid of all lecture courses

Was looking up info about UVM and came across this article. I'll probably still apply here next year, but with this info I'd think twice before choosing it over a more traditional program.

How do you fellow premeds feel about eliminating lectures and replacing them with group sessions? I think that I personally respond better to attending lectures. I like to pre-read, and then listen to the professor explain things (as long as he/she is focused on the lesson and is generally a good teacher). This gives me multiple "angles" from which to derive an understanding of a topic. I do also enjoy group discussion sections, and feel it gives students the opportunity to teach the material, which reinforces understanding. But attending lecture is helpful for me, much more engaging than having to watch a recorded video lecture... Having both options would obviously be ideal, but not realistic 100% of the time.

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

Like it or not, this is the wave in medical education these days. And one that's backed up by data, at least.

 

[theonlytycrane]

Would you change your mind if students were assessed on their performance in small groups?

Maybe. I really do like office hours with motivated peers that show up prepared and ready to learn from a prof/mentor. So if group sessions emulated that, then yes. I would want this to occur for the sake of learning though. I don't know how I would feel about being graded for this.

Do you think that assessment of small group participation would change the behavior of students who might be otherwise unprepared and/or unengaged?

Yes.

 

[P0ke]

I don't like flipped classroom, I could study 5x as fast on my own than being in a group discussion. Just give me the questions/answers with explanations and I can study it on my own, don't need to waste an hour discussing it, especially if it's something I already understand. We spend like 5-10 minutes on a question when I could've gotten through it much quicker on my own. And the metric they use to show that flipped classroom "works" is testing us individually, and then testing us after group discussion and showing that scores go up. Of course they're gonna go up after discussing it with someone else. That's like saying "students score higher on group tests than individual tests". Unless we're gonna be tested as a group, there isn't much carryover.

 

[Keona]

From what I've seen, students are evaluated using a rubric on multiple competency standards. The faculty member is asked to provide positive observations, suggestions for improvement and general comments. Some of the competencies are: effective communication and interpersonal skills (active listening, demonstrates understanding through summary and clarification), accountability and dependability (professionalism), Shares information clearly with faculty and peers, uses appropriate reference materials, etc.

I've been in some small group situations where each student independently prepares a talk on a specific, unique learning issue and there is no where to hide if you have not done your part. Another strategy is to have all of the members of the group take a quiz independently, then share answers and agree on an answer as a group. the answer is then revealed to the group. (There can be numerous groups working with one instructor in this situation.)

We had a mixed type of classroom with some lecture some tbls, some pbls. One of the grades we received was based on grading each other, if you gave everyone similar scores you were penalized for lack of variance. I felt like I was being forced to give my classmates lower grades to receive a better one myself. I am still annoyed about it several years later. Also it takes me longer to master the material than my classmates and to develop the deeper understanding. I would read the same things, do practice questions, etc and still not retain their level. I would have felt defeated if I was judged solely based on someone else's perception of my preparedness b/c they would think I had spent less time preparing which was not the case. (we had a worksheet to fill in, etc which demonstrated what work you had put in prior to attending the various lectures and it was obvious if someone had not done that). I agree some grading needs to take place but I disagree with everyone grading each other b/c I think it ends poorly. (I came out fine, but just had a negative association with the class afterwards and this grade system, I had a great group, others in my class did not, why should I have to give someone else a worse grade when they had done nothing wrong and everything right?)

 

[P0ke]

We had a mixed type of classroom with some lecture some tbls, some pbls. One of the grades we received was based on grading each other, if you gave everyone similar scores you were penalized for lack of variance. I felt like I was being forced to give my classmates lower grades to receive a better one myself. I am still annoyed about it several years later. Also it takes me longer to master the material than my classmates and to develop the deeper understanding. I would read the same things, do practice questions, etc and still not retain their level. I would have felt defeated if I was judged solely based on someone else's perception of my preparedness b/c they would think I had spent less time preparing which was not the case. (we had a worksheet to fill in, etc which demonstrated what work you had put in prior to attending the various lectures and it was obvious if someone had not done that). I agree some grading needs to take place but I disagree with everyone grading each other b/c I think it ends poorly. (I came out fine, but just had a negative association with the class afterwards and this grade system, I had a great group, others in my class did not, why should I have to give someone else a worse grade when they had done nothing wrong and everything right?)

I don't think it's ever right to put students grades in the hands of other students. I remember in my SMP, one guy said to one of the program directors "give me the power to fail others and I'll gladly do it."

 

[timephone]

We had a mixed type of classroom with some lecture some tbls, some pbls. One of the grades we received was based on grading each other, if you gave everyone similar scores you were penalized for lack of variance. I felt like I was being forced to give my classmates lower grades to receive a better one myself. I am still annoyed about it several years later. Also it takes me longer to master the material than my classmates and to develop the deeper understanding. I would read the same things, do practice questions, etc and still not retain their level. I would have felt defeated if I was judged solely based on someone else's perception of my preparedness b/c they would think I had spent less time preparing which was not the case. (we had a worksheet to fill in, etc which demonstrated what work you had put in prior to attending the various lectures and it was obvious if someone had not done that). I agree some grading needs to take place but I disagree with everyone grading each other b/c I think it ends poorly. (I came out fine, but just had a negative association with the class afterwards and this grade system, I had a great group, others in my class did not, why should I have to give someone else a worse grade when they had done nothing wrong and everything right?)

Ugh, that sounds like a nightmare... As a student I don't think I have the right to judge another student's preparedness or effort. And I wouldn't want to even if I had the right.

 

[LizzyM]

Ugh, that sounds like a nightmare... As a student I don't think I have the right to judge another student's preparedness or effort. And I wouldn't want to even if I had the right.

Medical education requires self-reflection as well as feedback to others. You will be doing this as a resident, fellow and attending. You learn to find something good in each fellow trainee and something that could be improved. It isn't "grading" but it is a narrative. It could be "you were well prepared and did an excellent job of seeing connections between seemingly unrelated findings to draw a conclusion about "Mr. Lee's" diagnosis however, you often interrupted others or spoke over them, especially the women in the class; this is something for you to work on."

 

[Med Ed]

How do you feel about this kind of curriculum? Does it mesh with your learning style?

If implemented properly, this approach will beat traditional lecture-based curricula in both student performance and student satisfaction. But there are caveats. First, just as lectures are of variable quality, so are active learning sessions. Not every one is going to be a home run. Second, depending on how much the institution is investing in faculty development, and how much buy-in there is from the faculty, the first rendition will probably be bumpy at times. This comes with the territory of every curricular revision.

Also, student acceptance will not happen overnight. Just as faculty are generally comfortable producing and delivering lectures, students are comfortable receiving them, having been conditioned by years of experiencing (and excelling in) traditional curricula. And, naturally, students seek comfort in their learning. They want to sit at home watching videos on 2x speed, memorize the information long enough to survive the exam, and then move on to the next piece. That's the approach that traditional curricula essentially demands from students. Newer curricula, however, are starting to demand different things. They want to make students mildly uncomfortable in just the right ways, which has been shown through decades of research to promote long-term memory and deeper understanding of the material.

If I were a prospective student I would have questions about what UVM is doing, but having now seen it work I believe it is the way to go.

 

[Med Ed]

Ugh, that sounds like a nightmare... As a student I don't think I have the right to judge another student's preparedness or effort. And I wouldn't want to even if I had the right.

You will have a much better time if you try and frame unfamiliar experiences in medical school around opportunity rather than torture. As @LizzyM says, feedback is omnipresent in medicine, and you will be giving and receiving it for your entire education and career. Peer feedback in medical school gives you the chance to learn how to do it (and also, likely how not to do it) with guidance in a no- or low-stakes environment.

The central complaint of clinical clerkships is ALWAYS that the grading is arbitrary and subjective. What if you could be part of the solution?

 

[mistafab]

I think that this format is the best way to utilize flipped classrooms. You were exposed to the material in a lecture, and now your teacher can cover what doesn't make sense.

I for one think this is a fine way of doing things.

 

[bannie22]

Standard lectures are definitely the best and I suffered alot at a medical school with a significant amount of time dedicated to PBL and lack of lecture organization and preparedness.

You went through 15 years of life learninf material a certain. No real need to change it up unnecessarily.

 

[theonlytycrane]

My final school decision was based on going for optional traditional lectures to avoid above ^^^.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app