Transforming the Standard Lecture into an Interactive Lecture: The CDEARA Model

Nurulhuda Abd Rahman; Azwani Masuwai

doi:10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss10.256

Authors

Nurulhuda Abd Rahman Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia
Azwani Masuwai Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol2.iss10.256

Keywords:

Interactive Lecture, Module, Model, Engagement, Active Learning

Abstract

The standard way of lecturing where students are passive recipients of knowledge and the lecturer as the provider of knowledgehas been the dominant way to deliver curriculum for so many decades.However many reports suggest that active learning methods can significantly increase learning gains.We report on the testing of a variant of interactive lecture model called the CDEARA Model through a module and a training workshop. This method is most clearly distinguished by the systematic and purposeful integration of a variety of ‘simple’ activities or techniques which we call Interactive Lecture Tools. We present and analyse a detailed example of the interactions during the workshop and analyse the evaluation of the module and the workshop as a whole.Data indicate an overall positive evaluation of the module and workshop. We conclude that the CDEARA Model is practical, effective, and amenable to implementation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Nurulhuda Abd Rahman, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia

Faculty of Science and Mathematics
Azwani Masuwai, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia

Faculty of Education and Human Development

References

Bonwell, C. C. & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHEERIC Higher Education Report No 1, George Washington University, Washington DC.

Caine, G. & Caine, R. N. (1989). Learning about accelerated learning. Training and Development Journal. 43 (5), 65 – 73.

Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1990). Understanding a brain-based approach to learning and teaching. Educational Leadership, 48 (2), 66 – 70.

Chabay, R. W. & Sherwood, B. A. (1995). Instructor’s Manual to Accompany Electric and Magnetic Interactions. New York: Wiley DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2808217

Costa, A. L. & Kallick, B. (2000). Describing 16 Habits of Mind. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am. J. Phys.66, 64 – 74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Johnstone, A. H. & Percival, F.(1976). Attention breaks in lectures, Education in Chemistry, 13 (2), 49 – 50.Laws, P. W., Rosborough, P. J., & Poodry, F. J. (1999).Women’s responses to an activity-based introductory physics program. Phys. Educ. Res. Am. J. Phys. Suppl. 67, S32 – S37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19077

Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.881735

McCroskey, J. C. and Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376464

McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P. and McCroskey, L. L. (2006). An Introduction to Communication in the Classroom: The Role of Communication in Teaching and Training. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Meltzer, D. E. & Manivannan, K. (2002). Transforming the lecture hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. Am. J. Phys.70 (6), 639 – 654. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1463739

Middendorf, J. & Kalish, A. (1996). Teaching Resources Center Indiana University, The “Change-Up” in Lectures, The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 5 (2).

Myers, S. A. & Martin, M. M. (2006).Understanding the source: Teacher credibility and aggressive communication traits. In Mottet, T. P., Richmond, V. P. and McCroskey, J. C. (Eds.) Handbook of Instructional Communication: Rhetorical and Relational Perspectives, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 67–88.

National Survey of Student Engagement (2006). Engaged learning: Fostering success for all students. Bloomington, IN : Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning . Retrieved October 13, 2014, from http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2006_Annual_Report/index.cfm.

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2001). Preliminary synthesis of the third high level forum on learning sciences and brain-based research: Potential application for education policies and practices. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/15302896.pdf.

Nurulhuda Abd Rahman & Noor Azman Razalee. (2012). Kuliah Interaktif Multimedia. In Nurulhuda Abd Rahman (Ed.), Strategi dan Kaedah Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. Selangor: Pearson Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

Nurulhuda Abd Rahman, Jaafar Jantan, Shahrul Kadri Ayop, Mohd Mustamam Abd Karim, Noor Azman Razalee, Roszairi Haron, & Abu Bakar Rejab. (2007). The International Journal of Learning, 14 (1), 255-266.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning works: A review of the research. J. Engr. Educ. 93 (3). 223 – 231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x

Young, J. (2008). Impact of research on policy and practice.Capacity.org, Issue 35. Retrieved October1, 2014, from http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/PDF/Articles/YoungImpactofResearch.pdf on .