NUS Home Page
 
  inside this issue  
Socratic Method for Engineering Education
A Survey of Tutorial Preparation and Participation
Increasing Student Participation: A Classroom Experiment
 
 
  archives  
Plagiarism
 - Vol. 11 No. 2, May 2008
Independent Learning
 - Vol. 11 No. 1, Jan 2008
Undergraduate Research
 - Vol. 10 No. 1, Jan 2007
Engaging Students
 - Vol. 9 No. 2, Jul 2006
Learner-centred Teaching/Learning
 - Vol. 9 No. 1, Apr 2006
Annual Teaching Excellence Award
 - Vol. 10 No. 4, Sep 2007
 - Vol. 10 No. 3, Aug 2007
 - Vol. 9 No. 4, Sep 2006
 - Vol. 9 No. 3, Aug 2006
 - Vol. 8 No. 7, Oct 2005
 - Vol. 8 No. 6, Sep 2005
Lifelong Learning
 - Vol. 8 No. 5, Aug 2005
Balancing Theory and Practice
 - Vol. 8 No. 4, Jul 2005
Learning with Technology
 - Vol. 8 No. 3, May 2005
Reflective Learning
 - Vol. 8 No. 2, Mar 2005
Active Learning
 - Vol. 8 No. 1, Jan 2005
Balancing Teaching and Research
 - Vol. 7 No. 7, Aug 2004
Preparing for the First Lecture/Class
 - Vol. 7 No. 6, Jul 2004
Interactive Technology in Education
 - Vol. 7 No. 5, May 2004
Collaborative Learning
 - Vol. 7 No. 4, Apr 2004
Student Motivation/Teacher Motivation
 - Vol. 7 No. 3, Mar 2004
Discussion in the Classroom
 - Vol. 7 No. 2, Feb 2004
IT-supported Learning Strategies
 - Vol. 6 No. 9, Sep 2003
 - Vol. 6 No. 8, Aug 2003
Heterogeneous Student Body
 - Vol. 6 No. 7, Jul 2003
Postgraduate Supervision
 - Vol. 6 No. 6, Jun 2003
PDP-T Research Projects
 - Vol. 6 No. 5, May 2003
 - Vol. 6 No. 10, Oct 2003
 - Vol. 6 No. 11, Nov 2003
Cultivating Leaders
 - Vol. 6 No. 4, Apr 2003
NUS Outstanding Educator Award
 - Vol. 6 No. 2, Feb 2003
 - Vol. 7 No. 8, Sep 2004
 - Vol. 7 No. 9, Oct 2004
Constructivism
 - Vol. 6 No. 1, Jan 2003
Continuing Education
 - Vol. 5 No. 1, Mar 2002
Cross-disciplinary Teaching
 - Vol. 5 No. 2, Apr 2002
 - Vol. 9 No. 5. Oct 2006
Curriculum Design/Programme
 - Vol. 4 No. 6, Dec 2001
 - Vol. 3 No. 5, Oct 2000
 - Vol. 2 No. 5, Nov 1999
 - Vol. 1 No. 1, Apr 1998
Demonstration-Based Teaching
 - Vol. 4 No. 1, Feb 2001
Discipline and Counselling
 - Vol. 5 No. 5. Aug 2002
Emotional Intelligence
 - Vol. 2 No. 1, Mar 10, 1999
IT in Education
 - Vol. 10 No. 2, Apr 2007
 - Vol. 5 No. 3, May 2002
 - Vol. 4 No. 4, Oct 2001
 - Vol. 4 No. 3, Aug 2001
 - Vol. 3 No. 6, Nov 2000
 - Vol. 2 No. 2, Mar 15, 1999
 - Vol. 1 No. 2, Oct 1998
Large-Group Teaching
 - Vol. 4 No. 5, Nov 2001
Learning Styles
 - Vol. 5 No. 6, Sep 2002 
 - Vol. 5 No. 7, Oct 2002 
 - Vol. 7 No. 1, Jan 2004
Problem-Based Learning
 - Vol. 3 No. 3, Aug 2000
Small-Group Teaching
 - Vol. 2 No. 3, Apr 1999
Spoon Feeding
 - Vol. 3 No. 2, May 2000
Student Assessment
 - Vol. 2 No. 4, Aug 1999
 - Vol. 6 No. 3, Mar 2003
Student Management
 - Vol. 4 No. 2, Apr 2001
 - Vol. 3 No. 4, Sep 2000
Teaching Evaluation
 - Vol. 3 No. 1, Jan 2000
Thinking Skills
 - Vol. 5 No. 4, Jul 2002
   
 
 
PDP-T Research Projects  
   
October 2003, Vol. 6, No. 10
Increasing Student Participation: A Classroom Experiment
Associate Professor Ng Hwee Tou
Department of Computer Science

At the Department of Computer Science, some of the undergraduate courses have large student enrolments. This is especially so for the lower level undergraduate courses. Lecturing to a large class poses some challenges. Typically, there is limited student interaction during each lecture. Consequently, how to increase student participation during lectures in order to facilitate teacher-student and student-student interaction becomes an important issue.

In this short article, I will share my experience in a classroom experiment conducted with the aim of increasing student participation. The experiment took place during Semester 2 of Academic Year 2002/03. The class involved had more than 170 students, mostly second-year undergraduates majoring in computer science. The course covered introductory artificial intelligence.

Ingredients of the experiment

One way to increase student participation is for the teacher to pose questions to the students. The hope is that students will be forced to think and reason when faced with questions, and that answering the questions gives them an opportunity to interact with the teacher. However, this approach of posing questions may not work well in practice. Lecturers and students are all too familiar with the situation when a question posed is met with deafening silence. Even after repeated prompting, students are still too shy to volunteer to answer the question. A better way to encourage students to speak up is needed.

In my experiment, after I posed the question, I first got the students to discuss in groups of two (i.e. each student discussed the question with his/her neighbour seated next to him/her) for two minutes. This serves as an icebreaker, since students are generally less inhibited when they engage in small-group discussions. It also achieves the aim of increasing student-to-student interaction during the lecture.

In order to challenge the students to engage in higher-order thinking, a question that leads the students to relate different parts of the course material and to ‘see the big picture’ is preferable, instead of a question that asks them to regurgitate facts. In the experiment, the lecture topic was on machine learning. The question I asked was: “Give an algorithm to generate a good decision tree that maps an example to a category, given a set of examples with assigned categories.”

At the point of posing this question, I had not touched on any learning algorithms. However, earlier topics of the course covered include search, representation and inference, and planning. It was pointed out to the students before that both inference and planning could be viewed as a search procedure. Hence, a deep understanding of these previous topics would enable a student to come up with an answer to the question posed (i.e. a search algorithm that views learning as search).

Another aspect of increasing class participation is to engage students in a discussion, instead of a one-way process of posing a question and getting an answer back. This can be brought about by asking sub-questions whose answers then lead to more subsequent questions. In this way, the teacher can provide hints and build upon the students’ partial answers, and foster an interactive discussion in the process.

Outcome of the experiment

After warming up by discussing with their fellow students first, the students were less inhibited in answering the question. After some hints and prompting, one student was able to come up with the correct answer. In the process, another student even asked me to clarify a point.

Overall, the outcome of this experiment is that the students did develop a deeper understanding of the connection between the different parts of the course material. The students became more active in class participation, not only in answering the question, but also volunteering to ask a related clarification question about the topic. The classroom atmosphere became livelier as a result.

Pausing a lecture to get students to first discuss among themselves a higher-order question takes up a bit more time. However, this practice does break the monotony of lecture and its occasional use brings benefits and increases student participation in a large class.

Back to Top

 

 
© 1998 - 2006 : Centre for Development of Teaching and Learning. All rights reserved