I was also somewhat put off by his suggestion that flipping over to Wikipedia was a sound replacement for historiographic methods and the use of primary sources in teaching the French Revolution.

Really?

REALLY?

To be fair, I think that what makes it *not* “one size fits all” is that a student can view the lesson at their own pace — they can pause, rewind, etc. In a “one size fits all” teacher lecture, students are far less likely to ask the teacher to stop and go over a point again.

Then, to tighten the message, he should rephrase to “It’s not a one time fits all.”

Truth is, all teachers could do this themselves, have a space for questions in the comments, and build the relationship by knowing what the students were not able to understand, regardless of the number of times it was re-played.

Khan provides an information-dump view of education and knowledge. So there is really nothing innovative about the process. Not saying there is no value, just that it is not great value.

The best part is that Khan is bilking Gates foundation, and has found a way to make an income by creating sound-bite teaching practices.

In our classes at our school, we have had some success recording lectures in class while we are giving them live and then we post them online to give students an additional option for review, make-up, etc.

We have also experimented with “flipping the classroom” in some Computer Science classes with mixed results. Some kids love it, some kids hate it. Unfortunately, you can’t really do both with the same section of students.

What bothers me the most about the Khan Academy discussion you see in the media is that many (mostly non-teachers) view this as a possible replacement for teacher-led instruction instead of a means to augment coursework or as a remediation method.

Time-shifting the lecture is innovating the practice. If the content is essentially identical and static, why not provide solid lectures that present that universal content?

When I’m handed my room of kids for 50 minutes, I don’t teach the same thing 20 different ways. I teach it one way, and then take questions. So let him teach it the one way in 10 minutes, and let me take more questions.

How is that not innovative? How does this not lead to more differentiation? How does this not create the time and space for stronger relationships in class?

I don’t get the controversy. I really don’t.

Tim and Andy are right. There is no way that you are meeting the needs of every student in your class when you teach the whole group.

If Khan, or some other video, can present the concept, then I, the teacher, can connect with small groups based on need or learning style and focus on differentiated and specific content needs. Instead of a 30:1 ratio for fifty minutes, I get a 5:1 ratio four five times during fifty minutes. Everyone wins.

The only problem is that access to devices for watching the videos can be and are scarce.

History will not be unkind to Sal Khan, I think. But it will be unkind to the national rhetoric surrounding him.

His lectures are certainly no worse than a typical high school/college lecture, and are probably better than average.

But there is really no nuance in the discussion of his contributions to the field. I think that was well illustrated by the Colbert segment.

Would those advocating serious changes in the ways we teach mathematics really be satisfied with marginally improving the quality of the lectures students receive, while massively improving their temporal accessibility? Probably not. Yet that’s what Khan represents. I have no beef with that, but it’s not the kind of change that will matter seriously in the long run.

This, I think, was missed by the Colbert segment (and, by the way, we need to remind ourselves NOT to expect serious policy discussion in that venue). When Stephen suggested that Khan’s lectures were unlike any he had seen before, I think he’s dead wrong. Substantively it’s the same thing we’ve all seen (and done) a thousand times over.

The people who teach math and science in the neck of the woods where I live coach football. We have winning football teams but when it comes to math and science our kids are dumb as rocks. You are just not going to make me believe that Khan’s videos are a problem. If this is what you are trying to do, don’t even go there.

In “flipped” instruction, I really don’t see the benefit of assigning a video (whether by Khan or myself or even the best possible lecturer) instead of a reading.

Lots of people love Kahn videos.

It seems that the vast majority of people who choose to watch them feel like they’ve learned a lot, and many come away with the idea that this is how education should be.

But they are all biased. They chose to watch. Many of them are adults, who have developed listening skills and mental maturity over the years that allow them to access the material better. Others are motivated students who go out seeking more information. If you *want* to learn, then it is easy! And the Kahn videos will give you a lot of mechanical skills.

Mechanics are important, and perhaps Kahn’s goal is to free up classroom and teacher time for more theory, exploration, and problem solving. But these videos are nothing new. They’re just a textbook. Now with voiceover. Roughly the same kids who are motivated to learn from the text will be the ones who are motivated to learn from the video.

So if they are interested, motivated, and smart enough already to think about, go to, and learn from the website, they will succeed at learning how to mimic examples.

Is this ( http://youtu.be/f15zA0PhSek ) better than the textbook? Is it better than the teacher doing that problem in the classroom?

<i."Roughly the same kids who are motivated to learn from the text will be the ones who are motivated to learn from the video."

Roughly, but not exactly. My son would far rather read from the textbook than watch a video lecture (me too). Video lectures can be slowed down, but they are damned hard to speed up. If you have decent reading skills and the material is not too challenging, a book is far faster than a video. An in-person lecture, where you can interrupt with questions, is a quite different experience than a recorded lecture. (Of course, a lecture that does not allow interruptions is no better than a video, and could be a lot worse.)

It seems that the vast majority of people who choose to watch them feel like they’ve learned a lot…

Unfortunately, that feeling is generally a bad sign.

…they will succeed at learning how to mimic examples.

That is exactly what they probably learn — no more and no less.

Again, what is the advantage of a video assignment over a reading assignment from a good book?

I think we are dealing with two separate issues – The one that Dan wants to talk about, and the one that we are all dealing with.

Firstly, Dan. It seems, at least to me, that you want to discuss the concept that Khan said these videos were not in fact “one size fits all”. However, by definition they ARE. Simply put, for these videos to be different “sizes” there would have to be multiple teaching strategies for the same video. If the video was on systems of linear equations, you would need to have substitution method, addition method, and graphing method. Only then would the videos have ANY chance to be anything different than one size fits all (And I’m not even sure my example is any different). While the mainstream media likes to point out that this is a bad concept, I don’t think there is anything wrong with it as initial instruction. Honestly, how possible is it for one teacher in a standard size classroom to be able to differentiate appropriately to every student every single day. Sometimes, one size fits all happens, but you try to improve upon the initial instruction as much as you can.

Secondly, it seems everyone else wants to talk about the merits on Khan’s or anyone else’s strategy of “flipping” or using video as a supplement to usual standard lecturing. I am not against the philosophy, but is there any student in the world who doesn’t get bored from the same learning strategies every day. I choose to flip my classroom around one a week, along with the multiple other strategies that I use to try and make class exciting as much as I can on a daily basis. If we look this the lens of Khan appropriately, I feel like there is a TON of value in what he’s doing. However, only if appropriately viewed.

Like many, I’ve made videos for my class. In fact this past year I made individual lesson videos (5-10 minutes in length) for each lesson I taught. The goal was to provide students missing class with a cliff-notes version of the lesson. It was also to inform the parents of my 8th graders what was happening in class. http://pre-algebra.weebly.com

It seemed innovative b/c (1) I was the only one doing it in my school, (2) the students hadn’t seen this type of intervention/support before, and (3) I received loads of positive feedback from students but mostly from parents.

With that said, just because it’s new doesn’t makle it innovative. The SMART boards were novel a few years ago, but they weren’t used for anything other than a novelty. My videos were not innovative. Posting them wasn’t innovative. I can’t say with any certainty that they helped anything. I just hope that I didn’t waste a lot of time making them.

Our school is going to pilot dozens of ‘smart’ classrooms, but even as a receiver of one of these classrooms, I’m struggling to determine how the addition of permanently installed hardware is going to make anything better.

Maybe I’ll just play videos of myself teaching my students in class as an warm-up, ask for questions, then assign homework to be done in class.

That’s an approach that my students haven’t seen. Is that innovative?

Also, I think it’s important to remember other benefactors: those without access to good books or regular education. As the internet becomes cheaper and more ubiquitous, sites like this will help bridge the gap between the global rich and the global poor.

Is a real teacher better? Certainly. Is a real teacher necessary? Not really, nor is a dozen expensive books. It is conceivable that within this decade rich and complete curriculum to get you from addition through calculus will exist online for free (and in other languages – Khan is working on this too). That’s not ideal, but it’s awesome.

The self-pacing possibilities excite me. With a bit more time, math class could become something each student takes at their own pace. Students who would be bored in class could go at twice the clip and get through Calculus by ninth grade – why not? In public school classrooms which so often go slower and slower for standardized testing, that could keep some great math minds in the game longer.

I ask a third time: In what way is it better to assign a video lecture before class instead of a reading from a good textbook? Is it just a matter of catering to illiteracy?

I think it’s important to remember other benefactors: those without access to good books or regular education.

It is a simple matter to make a free textbook available on the web; a great many math teachers have done so already. Also, a downloadable 1MB PDF file is a lot more generally accessible than a year’s worth of web videos.

As an example of Tanton at his best: http://www.youtube.com/user/DrJamesTanton?blend=1&ob=5#p/u/0/jUeIjZI32Jg

Although I don’t like the way Khan is glorified, he does have some good lessons. The algebra lesson someone pointed to earlier is a very nice intro.

His lectures don’t go deep, but some of my (college) students love being able to watch them. Watching video works very differently from reading textbooks, and many of my students who do not believe they can read a textbook are quite comfortable listening to the same thing on a video. And getting to pause it, replay it, and think about it while on their own is very empowering for them.

I love Tanton, but many of my students prefer Khan. Maybe it’s a first baby step forward, but for them it’s something.

As I look for ways to help my students develop a more positive relationship with mathematics, Khan is one of the many novelties I introduce them to, hoping to help them find something that works for them individually.

This gets away from one-size-fits-all by freeing up teacher time to work one-on-one with students.

My goal for my grade 9 course next year is to have every content lesson available as a video lecture(probably a link to Khan’s work), textbook reading and discovery process, then allow students to choose which way(s) they want to be introduced to the content. I’d like to add online homework questions so that students can do as many as they’d like, or as few.

The extra class time that gives me is time I can spend one-on-one and working on higher order skills rather than content.

Like many here, I’d never want to take the live teacher out of the equation (if there’s a pun there, please excuse it). However, I do think what Khan does can be improved with a web-based interaction between students and teachers. I’ve been using a message board on my web site, http://www.barnesclass.com, so students can view presentation videos and respond to each other or to me only on our message board.

Although I like the face-to-face interaction with students, this sort of online marriage of media is very effective for teaching and learning.

I await the day textbook publishers make their offerings available as free pdfs. :)

I am just reading a paper by the math educator Paul Cobb, who states that an environment for learning mathematics should incorporate the following qualities:

1.) Learning should be an interactive as well as a constructive activity – that is to say, there should always be ample opportunity for creative discussion, in which each learner has a genuine voice;

2.) Presentation and discussion of conflicting points of view should be encouraged;

3.) Reconstructions and verbalization of mathematical ideas and solutions should be commonplace;

4.) Students and teachers should learn to distance themselves from ongoing activities in order to understand alternative interpretations or solutions;

5.) The need to work towards consensus in which various mathematical ideas are coordinated is recognized.

I think what is of importance in conversation around teaching mathematics, lecture, text-based, video, etc., is the notion of authority: authority of knowledge, author-ity of knowledge, and authority for knowing. Each of these speak to the learner’s position of him/herself within the world, maybe called his/her (mathematical) identity.

I suggest that when education gets treated as “reception of knowledge” all (?) that is important in the role of the teacher and of schools can be discounted. It is the present (and previous — see 1930’s for example) danger of the economizing of education.

Cobb, P. (1990). Multiple Perspectives. In L. P. Steffe & T. Wood (Eds.), Transforming children’s mathematics education: International Perspectives (pp. 200-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

I just want to throw my opinion in the hat that flipping the classroom is innovative in many ways and something that I really enjoy. However, the video that you use to flip the classroom DOES NOT change between the one size fits all instruction that we are viewing. You are differentiating the learning structure for each student, but it’s about the ability to free up class time, not the video itself. I love making videos as much as anybody else, and I get very positive feedback, but I worry that we are making them out to be something they aren’t.

I have a bad habit of numbering my points on the internet. Anyway:

(1) The most charitable read I can give those comments by Sal Khan is that while his videos are still “one-size-fits-all,” a teacher using his videos can make the class room less “one-size-fits-all.” How? Before, a teacher was giving an explanation in class that 20% (or something) of students understood on the first try. Then 40% more students will get it on the second shot, but the first fifth are bored. Then 20% of the class will ask questions (majority of class is bored) and 20% go home confused. Now, I take it that the idea is that with Khan’s videos you can get the first few passes at home, so that 60-80% understand the material coming into class. The teacher can allow students who understood the lesson the night before to practice, and the teacher can focus in on the rest. Differentiation is easier, so the educational picture as a whole is less “one-size-fits-all” and less boring, even though the lecture is just as “one-size-fits-all” and just as boring as a human being lecturing. I think that this, at least, makes sense of what Khan was saying. I don’t think he was saying that his lectures are more engaging, or whatever.

(2) That having been said: there’s much to be worried about in this picture. As others have mentioned, there’s really no reason why the above can’t occur with a textbook, or an interactive website. That raises two related questions: what is innovative about video, and why hasn’t everyone been working on this more personal, more engaging, less boring learning structure with texts or interactive websites?

(3) If I assigned large chunks of nightly reading to my students, they wouldn’t do a great job with it. Most of them would read thinly, skimming over parts that they didn’t understand, and then quickly moving to the worked examples so they could duplicate them on the homework (or whatever). Then, in class, I would have a difficult scenario: half a class lost, half a class smugly assuming that they know everything that I’m going to say.

There has to be a way to teach my high school students the proper way to read a technical text, and I very much want to work on this next year. (Suggestions Appreciated!) But there’s a reason why I still reserve for myself the first pass on any new topic or idea. I want to frame it for them, highlight the difficulties, and show them what is exciting and interesting about it.

And how are videos different from textbooks? I should probably shut up and let psychologists and folks who actually have researched this stuff opine, but my own experience with videos leads me to believe that they’re focus-optional. If you’re being honest with yourself, you can’t “read” a chapter of a book without focusing, since the act of reading involves understanding each successive sentence. A video, on the other hand, is going to finish whether you understood it or not. I think it’s easier to fool yourself with a video. But it’s also easier to complete and requires less focus, which is why (I think) some of my students like it. In a word: laziness.

(4) I’ve learned most of my math since high school from reading textbooks, and I don’t think that you NEED to have a human being present for learning to happen. Otherwise, why the heck am I lugging all these books back and forth from the library. At the same time, most of my high school students aren’t able to read a text honestly enough to gain from it. And if Bill Gates is looking for a way to help us minimize lecturing in the classroom, I’d prefer he help me learn how to teach kids to read these books rather than working on videos.

(5) Now, one last complaint: I don’t think that Sal Khan is very good at explaining math. First, because his tone is constantly reassuring. “This isn’t so hard” or “But we know how to do this” are the wrong sorts of things to be telling kids. That sends the message that real effort isn’t needed to grasp this content. The sort of things I prefer to say in the classroom are “This is hard–let’s think about it for a minute” or “This is a big, new idea.”

Second, I just don’t think he does a great job providing context or motivation for algebraic procedures. Here’s a quote from his lecture on systems of linear equations:

What we want to do is eliminate a variable because if we can eliminate a variable we can just solve for the one that’s left over. The way to do that is, let’s say I want to eliminate, I feel like eliminating this y. I think you’ll get an intuition for how we can that later on. The way that I’m going to do that is make it so that when I add this to this they cancel out. Well, they don’t cancel out right now, and so I have to multiply this bottom equation by 4, and I think it’ll be obvious why I’m doing it.

Things are up to his feelings, they’re obvious, you’ll get it, don’t worry. Anyone in a classroom knows the sorts of questions that this explanation will yield: “Why can you just multiply it like that?” or “How can you just eliminate the y’s?” His explanation just skips the hard parts. He buys his clarity to students on the cheap, by just focusing on the easy parts.

Finally, with all the funding why can’t they have lecture videos that are easier to navigate? My kids just can’t find the right ones. I would have the site remember your state, and then present you with the lectures aligned with the particular state’s standards and sequences. I’d also have the videos organized topically in some way, so that all the “systems of equations” videos are grouped together in a more logical way.

A very debatable issue, given its 44 comments in only a day. Dan, I’d like to touch on the two points you’re making.

First, I think Khan uses what’s happening in far too many classrooms as his reference point when he says his videos are anything but one-size-fits-all. I’d imagine that he sees a “traditional” classroom as 55 minutes, 10 of which are warm-up and going over HW problems, 30-35 of which are lecture, and 10-15 of which are practice problems. That one size, as we know, does not fit all, and his alternative does fit more. A 10 minute instructional video can take 10 minutes for the students who get it and are ready to come into class to practice some more challenging problems. It can take 15 minutes for the kids who want/need to watch it twice, and maybe have some questions on particular parts/problems in the video. Or it can take 20-25 for the kids who need to see and hear things three or four times until it sinks in. Right there is three different learners (and I think we all know we have more than three different kinds of learners in our classrooms) finding a more customizable experience.

And second, kids will be less bored at home. It’s not the same lecture. It’s a 10-minute version of a 30 minute lecture, a lecture that takes 30 minutes because the teacher sees that three students are lost so he remediates on the fly and takes 2 minutes because someone called his classroom looking for so-and-so and takes 5 minutes to answer two questions while trying to engage the student who understood the concept 5 minutes before that. And they’re less bored because they’re checking the text that just came in while pausing the video while toggling to the window that has Facebook open. I’m not saying this is the best learning environment, but I’m sure they’re less bored.

I haven’t talked with Salman Khan, but those are my interpretations of the points he’s trying to make. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that his idea of a flipped classroom is an ideal learning situation. I did, however, before I knew who he was, send my kids home over winter break with video lessons and practice problems. They were then able to email me and submit their work or ask questions. It was a wonderful way for me to squeeze in two extra lessons over a two-week period when my students would have normally been completely detached from school-work.

As Jay-Z says, just my thoughts…

Where is the actual evidence of effectiveness?

That is my question.

There are clearly a lot of YouTube views and personal/incidental anecdotes out there. But as a 21st-century-educated citizen trying to make the best possible use of our scarce educational dollars, I want to know *ahead* of implementation that there are data to support (a) the conclusions which are being drawn and (b) the methodologies that are being promoted.

So please just show me the peer-reviewed data demonstrating that KA is more effective than any of the scientifically validated, evidence-based math or science pedagogies we math and science educators work with.

If it is indeed practical and effective, I have no doubt that — like other well-thought-out pedagogies — it will stand up to rigorous scrutiny and analysis.

Maybe I am old fashioned, but I just don’t get this trend. The motivated student seeks help. On video, in person, via email, and Collaborize. I give mathematics a human quality. A big picture, questions bring meta-cognition to a subject. How does one ask a video a question? I don’t get how what Khan is doing is different than what I can offer, except that it can be rewound and paused (and it is available 24/7) Don’t get me wrong, I think this is a fabulous community service for those willing to seek it…it is the undermotivated, the ones who can’t get it one way, the ELL learners, I don’t see my 3rd year Algebra 1 students bringing more to the table after watching the video…I’ve offered! Please use youtube, purple math, Khan Academy…students need to learn accountability first, critical thinking next, and then maybe a Khan video will make sense…

Amy

I can’t tell you how sad Dan’s sarcastic comment at the end of his post and the negative comments about Khan and his videos look to someone who’s not a math educator — but is still an educator (HS English lit) and the parent of a struggling math student. Why so much underlying bitterness?

The guy’s not perfect, but what he’s trying to do — at no cost to anyone reading this blog — is fantastic. I currently live in SE Asia, and for kids in poor countries here, who often don’t have access to a great math teacher like one of you, these videos represent a potential sea change. There’s an Internet kiosk in every village. Can you imagine the impact? And for my own children, who often sit through 83-minute math classes too embarrassed to ask a question, Khan’s videos represent salvation — or at least enough of an explanation to give them the confidence to raise their hand or give the homework a try.

Dan, I’ve been reading your blog since you started (I think Jose Vilson pointed me here many moons ago), and what you do with math instruction is amazing. I wish my kids had you (or one of your blog commenters) for a teacher. But please think about the affects of tearing someone like Khan down. He’s doing his best. He’s not charging for it. His efforts could have a positive impact on children who could really use the help. Maybe instead, you could offer to help him make his work better…. Can you imagine a Dy/Dan-Khan partnership? Now that would be cool.

So before you rip Khan a new one, I’d ask that you consider if what he’s doing might have any value that could serve

I don’t know what all the Kahn bashing is about. I don’t think he sees himself as a replacement for teachers, but as a supplement.

I tutor college math, and I recommended this to my students all the time. I have gotten only positive feedback.

Free math help for anyone? Thank you Kahn.

I did a version of the “flipped-classroom” using books back in 1998 and 2003. The idea was simple: I did not lecture, only answered questions about the homework and worked problems live–the students had to read the book and work on the homework before coming to class.

I blogged about it a year ago:

http://gasstationwithoutpumps.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/live-action-math/

The results were mixed–it worked very well when I did it with a class that opted to be in a section that had that organization, but not so well with a class that had it forced on them.

For those interested in helping students with “technical reading” I do recommend reading Mylène’s posts at http://shiftingphases.com/category/reading-comprehension/

I love her suggestion here of a “pause” and “rewind” button on each page!