Friday, 30 October 2020

How use of buzz groups /interactive windows affects learning outcomes

 

Lectures are often un popular with students especially those in advanced years of study, who demonstrate their feelings by not attending them (Merrili,2001). Students tend to get distracted or bored by use of lecture method to deliver content and often times we get sentiments that there is need to find creative ways of breaking down the boredom. Despite such sentiments universities still allocate lecture hours to lecturers to deliver their content. Lecture method is the predominant method and will continue to be as there is no enough evidence to suggest which mode can replace it in the long run.  With this problem in mind lecturers have to invent ways to motivate the students so as to enhance learning. One such way is by use of buzz groups which can be defined as an activity whereby students are asked to spend some few minutes discussing a question or concept or even solve a problem in small group.  Interactive window can be defined as any activity that is short in nature.  It is integrated within the lecture whose aim is to encourage interaction and stimulation of thoughts as per their sitting arrangements.  Bellon, Bellon and Blank (1992) says that buzz groups fosters independent, cognitive thinking among group members with less reliance or presenter-based rote memorization.

Buzz groups cannot work independently but in a combination with another method e.g. lectures. It is highly recommended while dealing with difficult topics or problems that are controversial and calls for consensus.  The formation of buzz groups depends on the criteria set by the lecturer and once formed the teacher then introduces the problem to be tackled.  Buzz groups should ideally have a leader and person who record the interactive participation proceedings. The teacher should allow each group to present its findings to the rest of the class hence each buzz group can detect limitations in their proceedings.  Ideally a buzz group or interactive window should take 5-20minutes depending with complexity of the work to be tackled. The teacher should walk around to ensure groups are on track and avail self for groups seeking clarification. The lecturer uses the opportunity to stimulate discussion by introducing twists in the problems being tackled. The teacher should announce once the time is almost over and stop all the discussions and reconvene the class and call upon group leaders to present their group proceedings. This method allows all the students to get involved even those who are shy to talk before the whole class can do it in their buzz groups.

Though this method seems encompassing and involves the learner actively some critics have identified some drawbacks. Firstly there is loss of teaching time as sometimes the discussions may spiral out of the allocated time hence teacher more time controlling the groups than teaching. Secondly there is reduction in content since lots of time is spent discussing the material teacher has given and the end may not cover entire syllabus. The third drawback is that there is a tendency for inaccuracy in transmission of factual information as students have to work out the solutions and sometimes may leave lecture halls without solutions.  Fourthly is that the students might resist the method as it burdens them. This may lead to negative perception about the unit and the teacher.  The last which is the greatest risk is the loss of control on what the students are discussing as teacher cannot be in all the groups at the same time. Despite these challenges this method can be deployed in a minimalist approach and it can it can enhance learning outcomes.

In a study by HuxMan  (2005) whereby he examined the acceptability of interactive windows whereby he  used semi-structured evaluations over five years and got 500 responses. He gave two short problem-solving or discussion sessions in each lecture for two classes and  it emerged comparatively that interactive windows enhanced recall and understanding but the evidence was generally weak. He concluded that interactive sessions minimizes boredom but cannot replace lectures entirely.

Traditional lecture method is considered a passive mode of learning which compromises the attention and recall abilities of students.  In such settings students are turned into passive listeners and no deep learning takes place. The attention span for a typical student is 10-30minutes hence need to change activity after 15 minutes and this is where interactive window or buzz groups come handy. With such changes in activities students are able to reflect on what has been taught and in so doing lead to deep learning. In a study by Young (2009) on vigilance in class he noted that although the standard lecture format {talk and chalk} had the lowest attention spans if the material is stimulating enough students perceptions and approaches to learning could still be influenced. In his first  two lectures (L1 and L2) he used chalk and talk method with lecturer addressing class via power points with no opportunity for rest or interaction. In Lecture 3 he introduced guest lecturer who used same method as L1 and L2. In L4 he introduced buzz groups discussion while halfway briefly.  His conclusions were that the buzz groups increased active learning and therefore deep learning and off settled the attention decrement.

In another study that targeted perceptions of active learning in a large cross- disciplinary classroom by  Machemer and Crawford (2007) . The study surveyed students perceived value of a range of teaching techniques (from traditional to cooperative) utilized within a general education class. Students rated the various techniques on an ordinal scale and the values were statistically compared using mean difference (paired sample test). The study found that students valued lectures and being active.  Any activity, be it active, cooperative or traditional, that directly relates to improving exam performance was the most valued of all.

We can conclude that students value buzz groups or interactive windows when blended with lectures as it enhances active learning and kills boredom. For the students there should be no compromise on the content to be covered by lecturer and at the same time the buzz discussions should enable them to pass exams. This means the methods should be used to enhance discussion of content especially if the class size is large.  The teacher should try to use others methods but not to over rely on the buzz groups as it enhances recall and improves memory rather than synthesize of what was learnt. The use of buzz groups calls for the teacher’s preparation and shouldn’t be used as an afterthought. It should be part of the lesson plan and students oriented on what is expected of them.

REFERENCES

Bellon,J., Bellon, E., and Blank, M. (1992). Teaching from a research knowledge base. New York: Merill.

Huxman,.M .Learning in lectures. Do interactive windows help? 2005; The Higher Education Academy. London Vol 6 (1): 17-31

Machemer.,P and Crawford., P (2007) students perceptions of active learning in large groups cross-disciplinary classrooms: Active learning in Higher education, March 2007 Vol 8 no 1 9-30

Merilli,.B (2001). Learning and Teaching In Universities: Perspectives From Adult Learners and Lecturers: Teaching in Higher Education 6: 5-18

Young,S., Robinson,S., and Alberts,P., (2009)  students pay attention! Combating the Vigilance Decrement to Improve Learning During Lectures: Sage publications, Los Angeles; Active learning in Higher eduction Vol 10 (1) 41-55

No comments:

Post a Comment