Effective Teaching

KAMPALA UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Masters of Education
Management and
Administration
EFFECTIVE METHODS OF
TEACHING AND LEARNING
Prince Jamil Wasajja

EFFECTIVE METHODS OF TEACHING
INTRODUCTION
Teachers’ beliefs, practices and attitudes
Teachers’ beliefs, practices and attitudes are important for
understanding and improving educational processes. They are closely
linked to teachers’ strategies for coping with challenges in their daily
professional life and to their general well-being, and they shape
students’ learning environment and influence student motivation and
achievement.
Furthermore they can be expected to mediate the effects of job-related

policies – such as changes in curricula for teachers’ initial education or
professional development – on student learning. While examining a
variety of beliefs, practices and attitudes in previous research, these
have been shown to be relevant to the improvement and effectiveness
of schools.
Effective teaching as a result of professional development
Professional development is generally associated with more (reported)

use of specific instructional practices. This means that teachers who
engage in professional learning tend to use specified practices more
often.
• The kind of professional development a teacher participates in is
more important than the amount of time invested. The net effects of
days of professional development are small and only significant in a
few countries, whereas indicators of participation in networks and
mentoring (and in some countries also in workshops and/ or courses)
Prince Jamil Wasajja 2

have significant and stronger net associations with teaching practices
in a majority of countries.
• Professional development activities that take place at regular
intervals and involve teachers in a rather stable social and
collaborative context (i.e. networks or mentoring) have a significantly
stronger association with teaching practices than regular workshops
and courses.
• Student-oriented practices and enhanced activities are more strongly
associated with professional development than structuring practices.
Net effects of indicators of attendance at professional development
activities are stronger and significant in a larger number of countries
for student-oriented practices and enhanced activities than for
structuring practices.
It should be noted that, although teacher background variables

(gender, experience, level of education and subject taught in the
target class) are controlled for, the associations found here should not
be interpreted as causal effects of professional development on the
respective teaching practices. Results may indicate that professional
development – particularly mentoring and networks for professional
development – are effective in instructing and inspiring teachers to use
modern and multifaceted practices, especially student-oriented
practices and enhanced activities. But it may just as well be that
teachers who report using student-oriented practices and enhanced
activities relatively often are generally more motivated to learn and
apply innovative teaching strategies and thus engage in more
professional development.
In many countries, professional development is more and more

implemented at the school level, with in-house training addressing the
teaching staff as a group rather than individual teachers. It is thought
that – besides changing teachers’ personal beliefs and individual
practices directly – professional development can help foster
collaboration and co-operation among teachers and have indirect
effects on beliefs and practices and a more general impact on school
quality. Table 4.8 provides data that help judge the realisation of this
goal.
Professional Competences
Instructional practices, in turn, depend on what teachers bring to the
classroom. Professional competence is believed to be a crucial factor in
classroom and school practices (Shulman, 1987, Campbell et al., 2004;
Baumert and Kunter, 2006). To study this, a number of authors have
used, for example, measures of the effects of constructivist compared
with “reception/direct transmission” beliefs on teaching and learning,
developed by Peterson et al. (1989). Teachers’ professional knowledge
and actual practices may differ not only among countries but also
among teachers within a country. To gain an understanding of the
prevalence of certain beliefs and practices it is therefore important to
examine how they relate to the characteristics of teachers and
classrooms. For example, previous research suggests that the beliefs
and practices of female and male teachers may systematically differ
(e.g. Singer, 1996).
From the perspective of education policy, however, it is even more

relevant to look at the impact on teachers’ beliefs, practices and
attitudes of professional background factors such as type of training,
certification and professional development, subject taught,
employment status (part-time versus full-time) and length of tenure. It
is important to note that any of these relationships can have different
causal interpretations. For example, professional development
activities may change beliefs and attitudes, but participation in such
activities may itself be due to certain beliefs. Good instruction, of
course, is not determined just by the teacher’s background, beliefs and
attitudes; it should also be responsive to students’ needs and various
student, classroom and school background factors. We can look at
whether teaching practices “adapt” to students’ social and language
background, grade level, achievement level, and class size. For
example studies on aptitude-treatment interactions suggest that
students with low intellectual abilities profit more from structured,
teacher-centred instruction, while students with high intellectual
abilities may gain more from less structured and more complex
instruction (Snow and Lohman, 1984).
Teachers do not act only in the classroom where they instruct students
more or less in isolation from other classes and teachers. A modern
view of teaching also includes professional activities on the school
level, such as co-operating in teams, building professional learning
communities, participating in school development, and evaluating and
changing working conditions (Darling-Hammond et al. 2005). These
activities shape the learning environment on the school level, i.e. the
school climate, ethos and culture, and thus directly and indirectly (via
classroom-level processes) affect student learning. Research
distinguishes between two kinds of co-operation by a school’s teaching
staff: exchange and co-ordination for teaching (e.g. exchanging
instructional material or discussing learning problems of individual
students) versus more general and more innovative kinds of
professional collaboration (e.g. observing other teachers’ classes and
giving feedback). It is assumed that both kinds of co-operative
activities will be influenced by school-level context variables such as a
school’s teacher evaluation policies and the school’s leadership, which
are covered in chapters 5 and 6 respectively of this report. As is known
from research on the effectiveness of schools (Scheerens and Bosker,
1997; Hopkins, 2005; Lee and Williams, 2006; Harris and Chrispeels,
2006), the quality of the learning environment is the factor affecting
student learning and outcomes that is most readily modified, given
that background variables such as cognitive and motivational
capacities, socio-economic background, social and cultural capital are
mostly beyond the control of teachers and schools. Research captures
students’ background by asking teachers and principals about the
social composition and the relative achievement level of the student
population they serve. A more important task for our research is to
assess quality, as perceived by teachers, at the classroom as well as
the school level. However, as the environment generally varies
between subjects and teachers, it is not easy to identify domain-
general indicators. Also, classroom climate is used because of its
strong impact on cognitive as well as motivational aspects of student
learning in different subjects. The method used here is adapted from
PISA and focuses on the disciplinary aspect. For example, the
statement “When the lesson begins, I have to wait quite a long time for
the students to quiet down” indicates a low level of classroom
discipline. It has been shown that classroom discipline, aggregated to
the school level, is a core element of instructional quality.
In PISA, it is positively related to the school’s mean student

achievement in many participating countries (Kliemeand Rakoczy,
2003). Also, it has been shown that – unlike other features of
classroom instruction – there is a high level of agreement about this
indicator among teachers, students and observers (Clausen, 2002). In
addition to the environment at the classroom level, school climate is
used as an indicator for the school environment. Here, school climate
is defined as the quality of social relations between students and
teachers (including the quality of support teachers give to students),
which is known to have a direct influence on motivational factors, such
as student commitment to school, learning motivation and student
satisfaction, and perhaps a more indirect influence on student
achievement (see Cohen, 2006, for a review of related research). The
triarchic model of instructional quality mentioned above (Klieme et al.,
2006; Lipowsky et al., 2008; Rakoczy et al., 2007) suggests specific
relations between teaching practices and the two climate factors:
structure-oriented teaching practices should primarily relate to high
levels of classroom climate, while student-oriented practices should be
linked with positive social relations.
BELIEFS ABOUT THE NATURE OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

The beliefs about the nature of teaching and learning which are the
focus of our discussion include “direct transmission beliefs about
learning and instruction” and “constructivist beliefs about learning and
instruction”. These dimensions of these beliefs are well established in
educational research at least in Western countries and have also
received support elsewhere (e.g. Kim, 2005).
The direct transmission view of student learning implies that a

teachers’ role is to communicate knowledge in a clear and structured
way, to explain correct solutions, to give students clear and resolvable
problems, and to ensure calm and concentration in the classroom. In
contrast, a constructivist view focuses on students not as passive
recipients but as active participants in the process of acquiring
knowledge. Teachers holding this view emphasise facilitating student
inquiry, prefer to give students the chance to develop solutions to
problems on their own, and allow students to play active role in
instructional activities. Here, the development of thinking and

reasoning processes is stressed more than the acquisition of specific
knowledge (Staub and Stern, 2002).
It is important to note the difference between beliefs on the one hand,

and practices, on the other. Both practices and beliefs are shaped by
pedagogical and cultural traditions. They represent different though
related parts of the pedagogical context for student learning.
The two indices for teachers’ beliefs about teaching comprise the
following questionnaire items:
Direct transmission beliefs about teaching

• Effective/good teachers demonstrate the correct way to solve a
problem.
• Instruction should be built around problems with clear, correct
answers, and around ideas that most students can grasp quickly.
• How much students learn depends on how much background
knowledge they have; that is why teaching facts is so necessary.
• A quiet classroom is generally needed for effective learning.
Constructivist beliefs about teaching

• My role as a teacher is to facilitate students’ own inquiry.
• Students learn best by finding solutions to problems on their own.
• Students should be allowed to think of solutions to practical
problems themselves before the teacher shows them how they are
solved.
• Thinking and reasoning processes are more important than specific
curriculum content.
Learning Styles as a factor in Effective Teaching and Learning

Learning Styles. Learning styles are “characteristic cognitive,
affective, and psychological behaviors that serve as relatively stable
indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the
learning environment”. The concept of learning styles has been
applied to a wide variety of student attributes and differences. Some
students are comfortable with theories and abstractions; others feel
much more at home with facts and observable phenomena; some
prefer active learning and others lean toward introspection; some
prefer visual presentation of information and others prefer verbal
explanations. One learning style is neither preferable nor inferior to
another, but is simply different, with different characteristic strengths
and weaknesses. A goal of instruction should be to equip students with
the skills associated with every learning style category, regardless of
the students’ personal preferences, since they will need all of those
skills to function effectively as professionals.
Approaches to Learning and Orientations to Studying.

Students may be inclined to approach their courses in one of three
ways. Those with a reproducing orientation tend to take a surface
approach to learning, relying on rote memorization and mechanical
formula substitution and making little or no effort to understand the
material being taught. Those with a meaning orientation tend to adopt
a deep approach, probing and questioning and exploring the limits of
applicability of new material. Those with an achieving orientation tend
to use a strategic approach, doing whatever is necessary to get the
highest grade they can, taking a surface approach if that suffices and a
deep approach when necessary. A goal of instruction should be to
induce students to adopt a deep approach to subjects that are
important for their professional or personal development.

Intellectual Development. Most students undergo a developmental
progression from a belief in the certainty of knowledge and the
omniscience of authorities to an acknowledgment of the uncertainty
and contextual nature of knowledge, acceptance of personal
responsibility for determining truth, inclination and ability to gather
supporting evidence for judgments, and openness to change if new
evidence is forthcoming. At the highest developmental level normally
seen in college students (but not in many of them), individuals display
thinking patterns resembling those of expert scientists and engineers.
A goal of instruction should be to advance students to that level by the
time they graduate.
Learning and Teaching Styles:

A Perspective of Language Education
Students learn in many ways—by seeing and hearing; reflecting and
acting; reasoning logically and intuitively; memorizing and visualizing.
Teaching methods also vary. Some instructors lecture, others
demonstrate or discuss; some focus on rules and others on examples;
some emphasize memory and others understanding. How much a
given student learns in a class is governed in part by that student’s
native ability and prior preparation but also by the compatibility of his
or her characteristic approach to learning and the instructor’s
characteristic approach to teaching.
The ways in which an individual characteristically acquires, retains, and

retrieves information are collectively termed the individual’s learning
style. Learning styles have been extensively discussed in the
educational psychology literature (Claxton & Murrell 1987; Schmeck
1988) and specifically in the context of language learning by Oxford
and her colleagues (Oxford 1990; Oxford et al. 1991; Wallace and
Oxford 1992; Oxford & Ehrman 1993), and over 30 learning style
assessment instruments have been developed in the past three
decades (Guild & Garger 1985; Jensen 1987).
Serious mismatches may occur between the learning styles of students

in a class and the teaching style of the instructor (Felder & Silverman
1988; Lawrence 1993; Oxford et al. 1991; Schmeck 1988), with
unfortunate potential consequences. The students tend to be bored
and inattentive in class, do poorly on tests, get discouraged about the
course, and may conclude that they are no good at the subject of the
course and give up (Felder & Silverman 1988; Godleski 1984; Oxford et
al. 1991; Smith & Renzulli 1984).
Instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile

classes, poor attendance, and dropouts, may become overly critical of
their students (making things even worse) or begin to question their
own competence as teachers.
In this paper, we will explore the following questions:
1. Which aspects of learning style are particularly significant in foreign

and second language education?
2. Which learning styles are favored by the teaching styles of most
language instructors?
3. What can be done to address the educational needs of all students
in language classes?
Dimensions of Learning Style

In the sections that follow, we describe five dichotomous learning style
dimensions derived from work of Felder et al. (1988, 1993), indicating
the ways in which the educational needs of students with strong
preferences for certain poles of the dimensions are not met by
traditional approaches to language instruction.
The concluding section offers a summary of suggestions for meeting
the needs of those students.
The proposed learning style dimensions may be defined in terms of the
answers to the following five questions:
1. What type of information does the student preferentially perceive:
sensory—sights, sounds, physical sensations, or intuitive— memories,
ideas, insights?
2. Through which modality is sensory information most effectively
perceived: visual— pictures, diagrams, graphs, demonstrations, or
verbal—written and spoken words and formulas?
3. How does the student prefer to process information: actively—
through engagement in physical activity or discussion, or reflectively—
through introspection?
4. How does the student progress toward understanding: sequentially
—in a logical progression of small incremental steps, or globally—in
large jumps, holistically?
5. With which organization of information is the student most
comfortable: inductive— facts and observations are given, underlying
principles are inferred, or deductive—principles are given,
consequences and applications are deduced?
Sensing and Intuitive Learners

In his theory of psychological types, Jung (1971) introduced sensation
and intuition as the two ways in which people tend to perceive the
world. Sensing involves observing, gathering data through the senses;
intuition involves indirect perception by way of the subconscious—
accessing memory, speculating, imagining. Everyone uses both
faculties constantly, but most people tend to favor one over the other.
The strength of this preference has been assessed for millions of
people using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) (Myers &
McCaulley 1985; Myers and Myers 1980), and the different ways in
which sensors and intuitors approach learning have been characterized
(Lawrence 1993). Sensor–intuitor differences in language learning have
been explored by Moody (1988) and Ehrman and Oxford (1990).
Sensors tend to be concrete and methodical, intuitors to be abstract

and imaginative. Sensors like facts, data, and experimentation;
intuitors deal better with principles, concepts, and theories. Sensors
are patient with detail but do not like complications; intuitors are bored
by detail and welcome complications. Sensors are more inclined than
intuitors to rely on memorization as a learning strategy and are more
comfortable learning and following rules and standard procedures.
lntuitors like variety, dislike repetition, and tend to be better equipped
than sensors to accommodate new concepts and exceptions to rules.
Sensors are careful but may be slow; intuitors are quick but may be
careless.
Moody (1988) administered the MBTI to 491 college language students

at the first- and second-year levels. Fifty-nine percent of the students
were intuitors, substantially more than the 40 percent found for a
sample of 18,592 general college students (Myers & McCaulley1985).
This pattern is not altogether surprising if one presumes that a
substantial number of the students were either majoring in a language
or taking the courses as electives. As Moody notes, language is by its
nature symbolic, which would tend to make it more attractive to
intuitors than to the more concrete and literal minded sensors.
Ehrman and Oxford (1990) studied learning strategies and teaching

approaches preferred by sensors and intuitors in an intensive language
training program. The sensors used a variety of memorization
strategies like internal drills and flash cards, liked class material that
might better be described as practical than fanciful, and liked highly
structured and well organized classes with clear goals and milestones
for achievement. Intuitors preferred teaching approaches that involved
greater complexity and variety, tended to be bored with drills, and
were better able than sensors to learn independently of the instructor’s
teaching style.
Basic language instruction that involves a great deal of repetitive drill

and memorization of vocabulary and grammar (the sort of teaching
style often found in pre-college and community college classes) is
better suited to sensors than intuitors. If there is too much of this sort
of thing without a break, the intuitors— who constitute the majority of
the class, if Moody’s results are representative—may become bored
with the subject and their course performance may consequently
deteriorate. On the other hand, strongly intuitive language instructors
may tend to move too quickly through the basic vocabulary and rules
of grammar in their eagerness to get to “the more interesting
material”—grammatical complexities, nuances of translation, linguistic
concepts, and cultural considerations. While the intuitive students may
enjoy these topics, overemphasizing such material may result in
insufficient grounding in the building blocks of the language.
The sensors, in particular, maythen start to fall behind and do poorly

on homework and tests.
Effective instruction reaches out to all students, not just those with one
particular learning style. Students taught entirely with methods
antithetical to their learning style may be made too uncomfortable to
learn effectively, but they should have at least some exposure to those
methods to develop a full range of learning skills and strategies (Smith
& Renzulli 1984).

To be effective, language instruction should therefore contain
elements that appeal to sensors and other elements that appeal to
intuitors. The material presented in every class should be a blend of
concrete information (word definitions, grammatical rules) and
concepts (syntactical and semantic information, linguistic and cultural
background information), with the percentage of each being chosen to
fit the level of the course (beginning, intermediate, or advanced) and
the age and level of sophistication of the students.
Visual and Verbal Learners

We propose to classify the ways people receive sensory information as
visual, verbal, and other (tactile, gustatory, olfactory). Visual learners
prefer that information be presented visually—in pictures, diagrams,
flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations—rather than in
spoken or written words. Verbal learners prefer spoken or written
explanations to visual presentations. The third category (touch, taste,
smell) plays at most a marginal role in language instruction and will
not be addressed further.
This categorization is somewhat unconventional in the context of the

learning style literature (e.g., Barbe & Swassing 1979; Dunn, Dunn, &
Price 1978), in which sensory modalities are classified as visual,
auditory, and kinesthetic. Since the five human senses are seeing,
hearing, touching, tasting, and smelling, we suggest that “kinesthetic”
does not properly belong on a list of sensory input modalities. A
student’s preference for motion or physical activity of some sort during
the learning process belongs in a separate learning style category: our
proposed system and Kolb’s (1984) model place it in the
active/reflective dimension, and the familiar model based on Jung’s
typology (Lawrence 1993) includes it in the extravert-introvert
dimension.
The distinction between the visual-auditory and visual-verbal
classifications has to do with whether reading prose is more closely
related to seeing pictures (which leads to the visual auditory contrast)
or to hearing speech (visualverbal). Three mechanisms have been
proposed for the process of extracting lexical significance from written
words (Martin 1978): direct access (the reader jumps directly from the
printed form of the word to its lexical meaning), indirect access (the
printed words are translated internally into sounds before information
about their meaning can be located in lexical memory), and dual
encoding (lexical memory can be reached either directly or indirectly).
An extensive body of research supports a form of the dual encoding
hypothesis.
Direct access is possible when words are familiar or when artificial

conditions imposed in a research setting make speech encoding
inefficient; however, when material is unfamiliar or difficult, lexical
memory is speechaccessed (Crowder & Wagner 1992). The implication
is that expository prose of the sort one finds in books and on classroom
chalkboards is much more likely to be speech-mediated than directly
accessed when silently read, and so belongs in the verbal rather than
the visual category.
Most people extract and retain more information from visual

presentations than from written or spoken prose (Dale 1969), while
most language instruction is verbal, involving predominantly lectures,
writing in texts and on chalkboards, and audiotapes in language
laboratories. Given the preference of most students for visual input,
one would expect the last of these modes of presentation in particular
to be unpopular, an expectation borne out in research cited by Moody
(1988). When community college students were asked to rank-order 13
instructional modes, including lectures, discussion, slides, field trips,
and audiotapes, audiotapes ranked at or near the bottom for the
overwhelming majority of students surveyed.
Recent studies of learning styles in foreign language education (e.g.,

Oxford & Ehrman 1993) consistently place reading in the visual
category, implying that instructors can meet the needs of visual
learners solely by relying on written instructional material. Certainly
visual learners learn better if they see and hear words in the target
language, but so do auditory learners: presenting the same material in
different ways invariably has a reinforcing effect on retention. The
challenge to language instructors is to devise ways of augmenting their
verbal classroom presentation with nonverbal visual material—for
example, showing photographs, drawings, sketches, and cartoons to
reinforce presentation of vocabulary words, and using films,
videotapes, and dramatizations to illustrate lessons in dialogue and
pronunciation.
Active and Reflective Learners

The complex mental processes by which perceived information is
converted into knowledge can be conveniently grouped into two
categories: active experimentation and reflective observation (Kolb
1984). Active processing involves doing something in the external
world with the information—discussing it or explaining it or testing it in
some way—and reflective processing involves examining and
manipulating the information introspectively.
An active learner is someone with more of a natural tendency toward

active experimentation than toward reflective observation, and
conversely for a reflective learner. Active learners learn well in
situations that enable them to do something physical and reflective
learners learn well in situations that provide them with opportunities to
think about the information being presented. The more opportunities
students have to both participate and reflect in class, the better they
will learn new material and the longer they are likely to retain it (KoIb
1984; McCarthy 1987).
Language classes in which all students are relegated to passive roles,

listening to and observing the instructor and taking notes, do little to
promote learning for either active or reflective learners. Language
classes should therefore include a variety of active learning
experiences, such as conversations, enactment of dialogues and
minidramas, and team competitions, and reflective experiences, such
as brief writing exercises and question formulation exercises. Small-
group exercises can be extremely effective for both active and
reflective learners (Johnson et al. 1991). Pose a question or problem
(“Translate this sentence.” “What’s wrong with what I just wrote?”
“How many synonyms for ‘happy’ can you think of in 30 seconds?”
“What question do you have about what we covered today?”) and have
students come up with answers working in groups of three, with one
group member acting as recorder. Such exercises engage all the
students, not just the small minority who typically participate in class,
and are a rich source of responses and material for subsequent
discussion. The exercises also relieve the monotony of continuous
lectures. In our experience, as little as five minutes of group work in a
50-minute period can be enough to maintain the students’ attention for
the entire class.
Group work must be used with care, however: simply telling students
to work together on problems or projects can do more harm than good.
Most references on cooperative learning (e.g., Johnson et al. 1991)
point out that students often respond negatively to group work at first,
and that the benefits of the approach are fully realized when the group
work is structured to assure such features as positive interdependence,
individual accountability, and appropriate uses of teamwork and
interpersonal skills. Reid (1987) studied students from a variety of
ethnic backgrounds and found that every background expressed a
minor or negative preference for group work, with English speakers
giving it the lowest rating. When language students have been taught
cooperative skills, however, they showed positive results in both
language skill and altruism (Gunderson & Johnson 1980; Jacob &
Mattson 1987).
Sequential and Global Learners

Sequential learners absorb information and acquire understanding of
material in small connected chunks, and global learners take in
information in seemingly unconnected fragments and achieve
understanding in large holistic leaps. on homework and tests until they
grasp the total picture, but once they have it they can often see
connections that escape sequential learners. On the other hand,
sequential learners can function with incomplete understanding of
course material, but they may lack a grasp of the broad context of a
body of knowledge and its interrelationships with other subjects and
disciplines.
Many authors who have done research on cognitive or learning styles

have noted the importance of this dichotomous pairing, and various
terms have been used to describe categories that appear to have
points in common with what we term the sequential and global
categories: analytic and global (Kirby
1988; Schmeck 1988); field-independent and field-dependent (Witkin &
Goodenough 1981); serialistic and holistic (Pask 1988); left-brained
and right-brained (Kane 1984); atomistic and holistic (Marton 1988);
sequential and random (Gregorc 1982). Luria’s (1980) working brain
model postulates successive and simultaneous modes of processing,
and Pask (1988) similarly distinguishes between stringing and
clumping modes of coding information and structuring responses.
Schmeck (1988) believes that the analytic/global dimension
encompasses all other cognitive styles, a belief shared by Oxford et al.
(1991).
Oxford (1990) proposes that this learning style dimension can be

tapped through studies of brain hemisphericity. She cites studies of
Leaver (1986) suggesting that left-brain (sequential) thinkers deal
more easily with grammatical structure and contrastive analysis, while
right-brain (global) thinkers are better at learning language intonation
and rhythms. Sequential learners gravitate toward strategies that
involve dissecting words and sentences into component parts and are
comfortable with structured teaching approaches that stress
grammatical analysis; global learners prefer holistic strategies such as
guessing at words and searching for main ideas, and may respond well
to relatively unstructured approaches like community language
learning that might not appeal to sequential learners.
Pedagogical Implications and Potential Misuses of Learning

Styles
Studies have shown that greater learning may occur when teaching
styles match learning styles than when they are mismatched but the
point of identifying learning styles is not to label individual students
and tailor instruction to fit their preferences. To function effectively as
engineers or members of any other profession, students will need skills
characteristic of each type of learner: the powers of observation and
attention to detail of the sensor and the imagination and abstract
thinking ability of the intuitor; the abilities to comprehend information

presented both visually and verbally, the systematic analysis skills of
the sequential learner and the multidisciplinary synthesis skills of the
global learner, and so on.
If instruction is heavily biased toward one category of a learning style
dimension, mismatched students may be too uncomfortable to learn
effectively, while the students whose learning styles match the
teaching style will not be helped to develop critical skills in their less
preferred learning style categories.
The optimal teaching style is a balanced one that sometimes matches

students’ preferences, so their discomfort level is not too great for
them to learn effectively, and sometimes goes against their
preferences, forcing them to stretch and grow in directions they might
be inclined to avoid if given the option.
The preceding paragraph suggests what we believe to be the most
important application of learning styles, which is to help instructors
design a balanced teaching approach that addresses the learning
needs of all of their students. Designing such an approach does not
require assessing the students' learning style preferences: it is enough
for instructors to select a model and attempt to address all of its
categories (in Kolb model terms, to teach around the cycle), knowing
that every class probably contains students with every preference [14].
Assessing the learning style profile of a class with an instrument such
as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, the Kolb Learning Style Inventory,
or the Index of Learning Styles—without being overly concerned about
which students have which preferences— can provide additional
support for effective instructional design. For example, knowing that a
large majority of students in a class are sensing and visual learners can
—and should—motivate the instructor to find concrete and visual ways
to supplement the presentation of material that might normally be
presented entirely abstractly and verbally. Many specific suggestions
for designing instruction to address the full spectrum of learning styles
are given by Felder and Silverman
What about identifying individual students' learning styles and sharing

the results with them? Doing so can provide them with valuable clues
about their possible strengths and weaknesses and indications of ways
they might improve their academic performance. Precautions should
be taken if students are told their learning styles, however. The
instructor should emphasize that no learning style instrument is
infallible, and if the students’ perceptions of how they learn best differ
from what the instrument says, they should not discount their own
judgment. They should also be assured that their learning style
preferences are not reliable indicators of what they are and are not
capable of doing, and that people with every possible learning style
can succeed in any profession or endeavor. If a student is assessed as,
say, a sensing learner, it says nothing about his or her intuitive skills
(or sensing skills, for that matter); it does not mean that he or she is
unsuited to be an engineer or scientist or mathematician; and it does
not excuse the low grade he or she made on the last exam. Instructors
or advisers who use learning styles as a basis for recommending
curriculum or career choices are misusing the concept and could be
doing serious disservices to their students and advisees.
Questions about learning styles

As previously noted, learning styles are controversial, with questions
commonly being raised regarding their meaning and even their
existence. Much work needs to be done to resolve these questions and
also to determine the validity of different learning style models for
engineering students and to confirm or refute claims regarding the
effectiveness of a balanced teaching approach. The following questions
merit investigation:
1. Does an assessed learning style preference indicate (a) the type
of instruction a student is most comfortable with or (b) the type
of instruction most likely to lead to more effective learning? To
what extent are the two coincident?
2. Do any learning style preferences depend on students’ ethnic
and cultural backgrounds? Which preferences, and what are the
nature and extent of the dependences?
3. To what extent does teaching exclusively to a student’s learning
style preference lead to (a) greater student satisfaction, (b)
improvement in skills associated with that preference, (c) lack of
improvement in skills associated with the opposite preference?
4. Does a curriculum heavily biased toward a particular learning
style increase the incidence of dropouts of students with conflicting
styles? To what extent does more balanced instruction reduce
attrition and improve academic performance of those students?
5. Is the provision of choice over learning tasks an effective strategy
for accommodating different learning style preferences? How much
choice should be provided and what kind?
6. How effective is instructional technology that provides alternative
pathways through a body of material, with the pathways being
designed to appeal to different learning style preferences?
7. How should learning style preferences be incorporated in
advising? How effective are interventions that take learning style
into account?
8. Does mixing learning styles when forming project teams lead to
better team products? Does it lead to increased interpersonal
conflict? If the answer to each question is “yes,” do the improved
products compensate for the greater conflict risk? Do making team
members aware of their learning style differences lower the
potential for conflict?
9. How helpful to students is discussion of learning styles in class?
10. To what extent are preferences on comparable scales of
different instruments correlated?
11. To what extent do the answers to any of the preceding
questions depend on the strength of students’ learning style
preferences?
APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND ORIENTATIONS TO STUDYING

A. Definitions and Assessment
Marton and Säljö [64] define three different approaches to learning—a
surface approach, a deep approach, and a strategic approach.
Students who adopt a surface approach to learning memorize facts but
do not try to fit them into a larger context, and they follow routine
solution procedures without trying to understand their origins and
limitations. These students commonly exhibit an extrinsic motivation
to learn (I’ve got to learn this to pass the course, to graduate, to get a
good job) and an unquestioning acceptance of everything in the
textbook and in lectures.
To them, studying means scouring their texts for worked-out examples

that look like the homework problems so they can simply copy the
solutions. They either ignore the text outside of the examples or they
scan through it with a highlighter, looking for factual information that
the instructor might consider important, which they will attempt to
memorize before the exam. Students who take a deep approach do not
simply rely on memorization of course material but focus instead on
understanding it.
They have an intrinsic motivation to learn, with intellectual curiosity

rather than the possibility of external reward driving their efforts. They
cast a critical eye on each statement or formula or analytical
procedure they encounter in class or in the text and do whatever they
think might help them understand it, such as restating text passages in
their own words and trying to relate the new material to things they
have previously learned or to everyday experience. Once the
information makes sense, they try to fit it into a coherent body of
knowledge. Students who adopt a strategic approach do whatever it
takes to get the top grade. They are well organized and efficient in
their studying. They carefully assess the level of effort they need to
exert to achieve their ambition, and if they can do it by staying
superficial they will do so, but if the instructor’s assignments and tests
demand a deep approach they will respond to the demand.
A student may adopt different approaches to learning in different

courses and even for different topics within a single course. An
orientation to studying is a tendency to adopt one of the approaches in
a broad range of situations and learning environments. Students who
habitually adopt a surface approach have a reproducing orientation;
those who usually adopt a deep approach have a meaning orientation;
and those inclined to take a strategic approach have an achieving
orientation. The Lancaster Approaches to Studying Questionnaire
(LASQ) is a sixty-four-item questionnaire that involves twelve subscales
relevant to the three orientations and four additional subscales.
Shorter forms of the LASQ that provide less detailed information are
referenced by Woods et al., and an alternative to the LASQ is the Study
Process Questionnaire developed by Biggs .Woods et al. Report on a
study in which one of the short forms of the LASQ was administered to
1,387 engineering students.
The strongest inclination of the students was toward a strategic

approach, followed in order by a surface approach and a deep
approach. Bertrand and Knapper report LASQ results for students in
other disciplines. Bertrand and Knapper also report on three groups of
students in two multidisciplinary curricula—students in the second and
fourth years of a project-based environmental resource studies
program and students in a problem-based program on the impact of
new materials. All three groups showed relatively strong inclinations
toward a deep approach. There was little difference in the profiles of
the second- and fourth-year students, suggesting that the results
might reflect the orientations of the students selecting into the
programs more than the influence of the programs.
There are similarities between orientations to studying and learning

styles. Both represent tendencies that are situationally dependent, as
opposed to fixed traits like gender or handedness that always
characterize an individual. Just as a student who is a strong intuitor
may function like a sensor in certain situations and vice versa, a
student with a pronounced meaning orientation may under some
circumstances adopt a surface approach to learning, and a strongly
reproducing student may sometimes be motivated to dig deep.
Similarly, just as students may be reasonably balanced in a learning
style preference, frequently functioning in ways characteristic of, say,
both sensors and intuitors, some students may be almost equally likely
to adopt deep and surface approaches.
Deep Approach to Learning

The teacher’s job is to create conditions that lead students to construct
accurate representations of the concepts being studied, first
abandoning prior misconceptions if any exist.
Certain features of classroom instruction have been found to be
constructively aligned with the adoption of a deep approach to
learning, while other features have the opposite effect:
1. Interest in and background knowledge of the subject encourage a
deep approach; lack of interest and inadequate background discourage
it.
2. Clearly stated expectations and clear feedback on progress
encourage a deep approach; poor or absent feedback discourages it.
3. Assessment methods that emphasize conceptual understanding
encourage a deep approach; methods that emphasize recall or the
application of routine procedural knowledge discourage it.
4. Teaching methods that foster active and long-term engagement
with learning tasks encourage a deep approach.
5. Opportunities to exercise responsible choice in the content and
method of study encourage a deep approach.
6. Stimulating and caring teaching encourages a deep approach;
apathetic or inconsiderate teaching discourages it. A corollary is that
students who perceive that teaching is good are more likely to adopt a
deep approach than students with the opposite perception.
7. An excessive amount of material in the curriculum and an
unreasonable workload discourage a deep approach.
8. Previous experiences with educational settings that encouraged
deep approaches further encourage deep approaches. A similar
statement can be made regarding surface approaches.
Well-established instructional strategies can be used to achieve these

conditions. Inductive teaching methods such as problem- based and
project-based learning can motivate students by helping to make the
subject matter relevant to their prior experience and interests and they
also emphasize conceptual understanding and de-emphasize rote
memorization . An excellent way to make expectations clear is to
articulate them in the form of instructional objectives —statements of
observable actions students should be able to do (define, explain,

calculate, derive, model, design) once they have completed a section
of a course.
Several student-centered teaching approaches accomplish the goal of

actively involving students in learning tasks , notably active learning
(engaging students in class activities other than listening to lectures)
and cooperative learning (getting students to work in small teams on
projects or homework under conditions that hold all team members
accountable for the learning objectives associated with the
assignment). Trigwell et al. found a positive correlation between an
instructor’s use of such instructional methods and students’ adoption
of a deep approach to learning.
Other references provide numerous examples of teaching in a

stimulating caring manner , providing clear feedback by, among other
ways, designing appropriate tests , and providing choice in learning
tasks. Several of the references cited in this paragraph and the
preceding one also summarize research connecting the instructional
methods mentioned with a variety of positive learning outcomes.
Inductive and Deductive Learners:

A Perspective on the Language
Learning/Acquisition Dichotomy
Induction is a reasoning progression that proceeds from particulars
(observations, measurements, data) to generalities (rules, laws,
theories). Deduction proceeds in the opposite direction. In inductive
presentation of classroom material, one makes observations and infers
governing or correlating principles; in deductive presentation one
starts with axioms, principles, or rules, deduces consequences, and
formulates applications. As with the previous dimensions, students
may have moderate or strong preferences for one or the other
presentation mode; in particular, they may prefer deductive
presentation because of its relatively high level of structure.
A large percentage of classroom teaching in every subject is primarily

or exclusively deductive, probably because deduction is an efficient
and elegant way to organize and present material that is already
understood. However, there is considerable evidence that
incorporating a substantial inductive component into teaching
promotes effective learning. Inductive reasoning is thought to be an
important component in academic achievement (Ropo 1987). Current
cognitive research emphasizes the importance of prior knowledge in
learning (Glaser 1984); introducing new material by linking it to
observed or previously known material is essentially inductive. The
benefits claimed for inductive instructional approaches (e.g., discovery
or inquiry learning) include increased academic achievement and
enhanced abstract reasoning skills (Taba 1966), longer retention of
information (McConnell 1934; Swenson 1949), and improved ability to
apply principles (Lahti 1986).
Insofar as foreign languages are concerned, we propose that the

distinction between induction and deduction is akin to the distinction
between language acquisition and learning. To acquire a language
means to pick it up gradually, gaining the ability to communicate with
it without necessarily being able to articulate the rules. Individuals
absorb what they can from the abundant and continuous input that
bombards them; they cannot grasp all they hear, but each day
increases their ability to understand, retain, and use in conversation
what they have taken in. Throughout the process they gain in their
ability to transfer strategies, make assumptions about the new
language system, formulate and test rules, and either keep or abandon
them. They continue this process (most of which is subconscious) until
they fossilize, which they may do as soon as they feel they have
learned what they need to in order to communicate in the language
(Coulter 1983). In its progression from specifics to generalizations,
acquisition is an inductive process.
On the other hand, language learning is a largely conscious process

that involves formal exposure to rules of syntax and semantics
followed by specific applications of the rules, with corrective feedback
reinforcing correct usage and discouraging incorrect usage. The flow of
the learning process from general to specific suggests its
characterization as a deductive process.
Three well-known approaches illustrate deductive and inductive

approaches to language instruction. The first is the grammar
translation method, rooted in the formal teaching of Latin and Greek
that prevailed in Europe for many centuries (Rivers 1968). This method
involves the translation of literary texts followed by explanation (in the
students’ native language) of rules of grammar. As Corder notes,
grammar-translation is “the most deductive approach” (Allen & Corder
1975,13). A later approach is the direct method, in which classes are
taught entirely in the target language; grammar is taught inferentially
and plays a secondary role to oral communication. This approach,
which was in vogue in many countries throughout the nineteenth
century (Allen & Corder 1975, 18), is almost purely inductive.
The third approach is the audio-oral method, according to which

language is a set of habits with vocabulary being of secondary
concern. In this method, which was influenced by behavioral
psychology and structural linguistics, students learn by repeating
structural patterns and eventually automatize the structures, aided by
positive reinforcement provided by the teacher. This approach
combines acquired verbal skills (inductive) with learned reading and
writing skills (deductive), with emphasis on the former. As Allen and
Corder point out, “Advocates of the oral method have assumed that
language learning is an inductive rather than a deductive process.”
(Allen & Corder 1975, 46). Many common instructional techniques
(e.g., the silent way, suggestopaedia, community language learning,
the total physical response, the communicative approach) essentially
fall into this category, although all may involve some deductive
elements.
A long-standing controversy in language education has to do with

whether languages can be acquired in the classroom or only learned.
Brown (1980, 7), McLaughlin (1987, 20), and
Gregg (1987) believe that both learning and acquisition may go on in
classrooms. Krashen and Terrell (1983, 18) hold that acquisition can
only occur in natural settings, but later admit that “despite our
conclusion that language teaching is directed at learning and not
acquisition, we think that it is possible to encourage acquisition very
effectively in the classroom” (Krashen & Terrell 1983, 27). We agree,
and believe that the key question facing language educators is, what
classroom conditions and procedures facilitate the occurrence of
language acquisition?
An important consideration in attacking this question has to do with

the use to which an acquired or learned language is likely to be
applied. By its very nature, language acquisition is more likely to
manifest in oral fluency than in correct utilization of the written
language and conversely for language learning.
Complete command of a language thus involves both acquisition—an
inductive process, required to speak fluently—and learning—a
deductive process, required to write grammatically. The two processes
are not competitive but complementary, just as inductive and
deductive reasoning are essential and coequal components of the
scientific method. By analogy, it would appear that an ideal classroom
setting for teaching a foreign language would be one that stimulates
and facilitates both inductive and deductive learning processes, both
acquisition and learning. We return to this theme in the concluding
section of the paper.
Collaborative Learning
“Collaborative learning” is an umbrella term for a variety of
educational approaches involving joint intellectual effort by students,
or students and teachers together. Usually, students are working in
groups of two or more, mutually searching for understanding,
solutions, or meanings, or creating a product. Collaborative learning
activities vary widely, but most center on students’ exploration or
application of the course material, not simply the teacher’s
presentation or explication of it.
Collaborative learning represents a significant shift away from the

typical teachercentered or lecture-centered milieu in college
classrooms. In collaborative classrooms, the lecturing/ listening/note-
taking process may not disappear entirely, but it lives alongside other
processes that are based in students’ discussion and active work with
the course material. Teachers who use collaborative learning
approaches tend to think of themselves less as expert transmitters of
knowledge to students, and more as expert designers of intellectual
experiences for students-as coaches or mid-wives of a more emergent
learning process.

Assumptions about Learning
Though collaborative learning takes on a variety of forms and is
practiced by teachers of different disciplinary backgrounds and
teaching traditions, the field is tied together by a number of important
assumptions about learners and the learning process.
Learning is an active, constructive process: To learn new

information, ideas or skills, our students have to work actively with
them in purposeful ways. They need to integrate this new material with
what they already know-or use it to reorganize what they thought they
knew. In collaborative learning situations, our students are not simply
taking in new information or ideas. They are creating something new
with the information and ideas.
These acts of intellectual processing- of constructing meaning or
creating something new-are crucial to learning.
Learning depends on rich contexts: Recent research suggests

learning is fundamentally influenced by the context and activity in
which it is embedded (Brown, Collins and Duguid, 1989). Collaborative
learning activities immerse students in challenging tasks or questions.
Rather than beginning with facts and ideas and then moving to
applications, collaborative learning activities frequently begin with
problems, for which students must marshal pertinent facts and ideas.
Instead of being distant observers of questions and answers, or
problems and solutions, students become immediate practitioners.
Rich contexts challenge students to practice and develop higher order
reasoning and problem solving skills.
Learners are diverse: Our students bring multiple perspectives to

the classroom-diverse backgrounds, learning styles, experiences, and
aspirations. As teachers, we can no longer assume a one-size-fits- all
approach. When students work together on their learning in class, we
get a direct and immediate sense of how they are learning, and what
experiences and ideas they bring to their work. The diverse
perspectives that emerge in collaborative ‘activities are clarifying but
not just for us. They are illuminating for our students as well.
Learning is inherently social: As Jeff Golub points out,

“Collaborative learning has as its main feature a structure that allows
for student talk: students are supposed to talk with ach other....and it
is in this talking that much of the learning occurs.” (Golub, 1988)
Collaborative learning produces intellectual synergy of many minds
coming to bear on a problem, and the social stimulation of mutual
engagement in a common endeavor. This mutual exploration,
meaning-making, and feedback often leads to better understanding on
he part of students, and to the creation of new understandings for all
of us.
Goals for Education

While we use collaborative learning because we believe it helps
students learn more effectively, many of us also place a high premium
on teaching strategies that go beyond ere mastery of content and
ideas. We believe collaborative learning promotes a larger educational
agenda, one that encompasses several intertwined rationales.
Involvement. Calls to involve students more actively in their learning

are coming from virtually every quarter of higher education (Astin,
1985; Bonwell and Eison, 1991; Kuh, 990; Study Group on the
Conditions of Excellence in Higher Education, 1984).
Involvement in learning, involvement with other students, and
involvement with faculty e factors that make an overwhelming
difference in student retention and success in college. By its very
nature, collaborative learning is both socially and intellectually
involving. It invites students to build closer connections to other
students, their faculty, heir courses and their learning.
Cooperation and teamwork. In collaborative endeavors, students

inevitably encounter difference, and must grapple with recognizing and
working with it. Building the capacities for tolerating or resolving
differences, for building agreement that honors all the voices in a
group, for caring how others are doing -- these abilities are crucial
aspects of living in a community. Too often the development of these
values and skills is relegated to the “Student Life” side of the campus.
Cultivation of teamwork, community building, and leadership skills are
legitimate and valuable classroom goals, not just extracurricular ones.
Civic Responsibility: If democracy is to endure in any meaningful

way, our educational system must foster habits of participation in and
responsibility to the larger community. Collaborative learning
encourages students to acquire an active voice in shaping their ideas
and values and a sensitive ear in hearing others. Dialogue,
deliberation, and consensus-building out of differences are strong
threads in the fabric of collaborative learning, and in civic life as well.
Collaborative Learning Approaches

Collaborative learning covers a broad territory of approaches with wide
variability in the amount of in-class or out-of-class time built around
group work. Collaborative activities can range from classroom
discussions interspersed with short lectures, through entire class
periods, to study on research teams that last a whole term or year. The
goals and processes of collaborative activities also vary widely. Some
faculty members design small group work around specific sequential
steps, or tightly structured tasks. Others prefer a more spontaneous
agenda developing out of student interests or questions. In some
collaborative learning settings, the students’ task is to create a clearly
delineated product; in others, the task is not to produce a product, but
rather to participate in a process, an exercise of responding to each
other’s work or engaging in analysis and meaning-making.
Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning represents the most carefully structured end of
the collaborative learning continuum. Defined as “the instructional use
of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own
and each other’s learning” (Johnson et al. 1990), cooperative learning
is based on the social interdependence theories of Kurt Lewin
andMorton Deutsch (Deutsch, 1949; Lewin, 1935). These theories and
associated research explore the influence of the structure of social
interdependence on individual interaction within a given situation
which, in turn, affects the outcomes of that interaction (Johnson and
Johnson, 1989). Pioneers in cooperative learning, David and Roger
Johnson at the University of Minnesota, Robert Slavin at Johns Hopkins
University, and Elizabeth Cohen at Stanford, have devoted years of
detailed research and analysis to clarify the conditions under which
cooperative, competitive, or individualized goal structures affect or
increase student achievement, psychological adjustment, self-esteem,
and social skills.
In cooperative learning, the development of interpersonal skills is as

important as the learning itself. The development of social skills in
group work-learning to cooperate – is key to high quality group work.
Many cooperative learning tasks are put to students with both
academic objectives and social skills objectives. Many of the strategies
involve assigning roles within each small group (such as recorder,
participation encourager, summarizer) to ensure the positive
interdependence of group participants and to enable students to
practice different teamwork skills. Built into cooperative learning work
is regular “group processing,” a “debriefing” time where students
reflect on how they are doing in order to learn how to become more
effective in group learning settings (Johnson, Johnson and Holubec,
1990).
Problem-Centered Instruction
Problem-centered instruction, widely used in professional education,
frequently is built around collaborative learning strategies. Many of
these spring from common roots, especially the work of John Dewey in
the early part of this century. Dewey endorsed discussion-based
teaching and believed strongly in the importance of giving students
challenges to own discovery.
EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND LEARNING IN LARGE CLASSES
Introduction and General Objectives
Introduction
The expansion in enrolment in higher institutions in Africa in the midst
of limited resources translated in the 1980s and 1990s into more
numbers in classes. The phenomenon of large classes is
What counts is
fast becoming one to be contended with in most higher not the size of the
institutions in the region. The outlook for the future? class, but the
quality of the
Many more large classes. But of course, large classes teaching.
are found in institutions the world over. Since we cannot Research
suggests that the
wish large classes away, we have to devise techniques key to effective
instruction and
for delivering good quality education in such settings.
student learning,
regardless of
class size, is
engaging
students in active
Prince Jamil Wasajja
learning. 37
This module is to assist those teachers who have responsibility for
teaching large classes to do so with a smile!
We often think that learning occurs in proportion to class size:
the smaller the class, the more students learn. However, while
research shows that small classes provide more opportunities for
feedback and discussion than large classes, as well as greater student
satisfaction, it does not suggest that class size is necessarily a
correlate of student learning. What counts is not the size of the class,
but the quality of the teaching. Research suggests that the key to
effective instruction and student learning, regardless of class size, is
engaging students in active learning.
At the end of this module, you should have:

• developed a working definition of a large class; and
• acquired basic techniques of teaching large classes GENERAL
OBJECTIVES
for optimal learning.
What is a Large Class?
Putting first things first, the question to be addressed as we start our

study of this module is “what is a large class?” This question was put
to some senior academics attending a UNESCO Regional Workshop on
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education at Moi University, Eldoret,
Kenya. Here are excerpts of views expressed.
• “There is nothing like a large class. The large class is only in the
mind of the orthodox teacher”
• “A large class is one with more students than available facilities can
support”
• “Large classes have more than 100 students enrolled”

• “There is no fixed number. The large class depends on the
discipline- smaller number for engineering, science and medicine
and larger number for the arts, humanities, and social sciences”
What are other views on large classes? There is no agreed definition of

a large class in the literature, nor should there be. One person’s large
class is what some others consider as ‘regular’, ‘small’ or ‘normal’.
Some teachers simply define "large" as "too many students to learn
names by the end of the term or semester." Whether something feels
like a large class is partly a matter of the resources put into teaching it
and of the skill employed by the teacher. For example, a social science
lecturer who works alone with a class of 40-50 and who grades
students on coursework essays and essay-type examinations finds this
to be a large class. However, a language lecturer may not think 50
students makes for a large class. So, let’s say that a large class is one
that feels large and that a sign of this will often be that you feel that
the size of the class stops you from working in your preferred way. This
module is about making large classes feel smaller; about weakening
feelings that the number of students is disempowering the professor;
and about helping students to feel better about the large classes that
are likely to greet them in their first year at the higher institution.
For our purpose, we suggest that a large class is one that feels large.
Signs that the class is ‘large’ can be:
• The class is significantly larger than you are used to.
• The resources can no longer cope with the number of students if
you desire individual attention for the students.
One thing is sure. Whether we have a working definition or not, the

phenomenon exists. Since we have identified some of the

characteristics, we should now proceed with how to cope with it.
Reflect on the concept of a large class.

Organise a discussion in your department on
Activity 5.1  the meaning of a large class. What are the
main similarities and differences in the
definitions provided during the discussion?
How Does Class Size Make a Difference?
Studies on the effects of class size have been conducted since

the 1920's. Results have often been mixed, with some methods of
instruction favouring small classes and other methods being as or
more effective in large classes. Large classes are as effective as small
classes when the goals involve learning factual information and
comprehending that information. When traditional achievement tests
are used to measure learning, large classes compare well with smaller
classes.
Smaller classes have been found more effective when
instructional goals involve higher level cognitive skills including
application, analysis, and synthesis. Smaller classes provide for greater
contact between students and lecturer, which appears to be most
needed for students with low motivation, those with little knowledge of
the subject matter, or those who have difficulty grasping conceptual
material. Smaller classes are also more effective than large ones in
affecting student attitudes. In sum, the optimal size of a class depends
on the instructional goals being pursued. The main advantage smaller
classes have over larger ones is that they provide students with
greater opportunities for interaction with subject matter, with the
professor and with one another.
Now to the down side of large classes. Teaching large classes
has been found to adversely affect morale, motivation and self-esteem
of teachers. Although many teachers could manage a class of almost
any size successfully, this could often be at the expense of the
teacher's own well being and the range of learning experiences offered
to students. Many teachers of large classes feel they spend too much
time on organising and managing class activities and not enough on
meeting the needs of individual children. Large classes and
overcrowded classrooms have negative effects on students' behaviour
and learning.
Some other problems with large classes are:
• Students become faces instead of people
• It is harder to give individual advice and guidance to students
• Organisational problems are compounded, making it difficult to
schedule tutorials, laboratory sessions, and fieldwork
• There can be technical problems working with large classes e.g.
difficulties in projecting slides that are clearly visible to all
students.
• Monitoring of attendance can be difficult, thus encouraging
students to cut classes
• Coping with large numbers of assignments and examination
scripts is a source of difficulty
• The quality of feedback to students can be much reduced in
large classes.
Table 5.1 gives some comparison between small and large classes.
Table 5.1 Comparing Large and Small Classes
Teachers' views on teaching larger and smaller classes

Larger classes Smaller classes
Students receive less individual Students receive more individual attention
attention
A more restricted range of teaching Flexibility to vary teaching and learning
and learning activities activities
Whole-class teaching sometimes Whole-class teaching employed when
employed for control and keeping appropriate to the activity
students on task
Group work hard to manage because Group work can be employed effectively and
of too many or too large groups flexibly
Restricted opportunities for student Better quality assessment and feedback to
assessment and individual feedback students
Limitations to practical activities More opportunities for active learning
Teachers work extremely hard to More reasonable workloads enabling teachers
offset the effects of larger class size to put their energies into meeting the needs of
students
No doubt these obstacles are numerous. Since we cannot wish large

classes away, we have to devise techniques for coping and ensure that
our students benefit from participation in a large class. Let us now
examine how we go about this.
Developing and Implementing

Curriculum for Large Classes
Introduction
Should we organise learning experiences for small classes and large

ones in the same way? Clearly not. Since the demands of large classes
are different from those of small classes, we need to prepare our
programme to take the differences in demands into consideration.
What demands are we talking about here? We are referring to the
demands of space, equipment, and the demands of evaluation. We are
proceeding with the assumption that our objectives for the course or
programme are the same irrespective of whether or not we are faced
with a large class or a small class.
At the end of this Unit, you should be able to:

SPECIFIC
OBJECTIVES
• plan a course of work for students in a large class considering the
demands of space, equipment and evaluation;
• organise practical work for students in large classes; and
• recognise the need for equity in implementing a programme for
large classes.
Taking Demand of Space into Consideration
The learning experiences we have planned for our students in a course

for example in science or the languages need not be watered down on
account of presentation to a large rather than to a small class when
space comes in as a limitation. Space here could mean lecture room,
laboratory or workshop space. Our institution probably has room to
accommodate 50 students for the course. In the next several years, we
have been compelled to enrol 300 students for the same course. Or we
have been asked to prepare a new programme for a course which has
an outlook of high enrolment, yet space in our institution is limiting.
Taking another example, a rather common one, how do we plan for
many of our introductory courses that have high enrolment but whose
space allotment for lectures and practicals is tight and choked? In all of
these, we should not take any activity out of the normal programme of
work. What we need to tinker with is how we take full advantage of the
space limitation. But how do we do this?
How should we plan for introductory courses

that have high enrolment but whose space
Activity 5.2  allotment for lectures and practicals is tight
and choked? How do you take full advantage
of space limitation in your institution to
address the space requirements of large introductory classes?

Taking Demand of Equipment into Consideration
So we probably have ample space but equipment is short and unable

to go round the large number of students. For example, we have 120
language students for equipment fitted for 35 students in a language
laboratory. Also an engineering workshop with equipment for 30
students; but here we are with 75 students. As we agreed, course
content remains the same.
How do you organise and implement learning

Activity 5.3  experiences when your class is large and
equipment is in short supply?
Taking Demand of Evaluation into Consideration
We expect that the progress of students in a large class should be

monitored and reported upon with a rigour that is similar to that of
students in a relatively small class. We expect that every student in
the large class should have opportunities of doing assignments, of
doing tests and of asking questions in class and of having a feedback
on his or her performance.
How do we plan our programme to take the

large number of students into consideration
while evaluating large classes?
Activity 5.4 
Organising Practical Work for Large Classes
If there is one issue that keeps teachers in higher institutions nervous

when confronted with large classes, it is how to run practical sessions
with the same fervour as they do for small classes. It is sad to note
that many give up and do either of two things. One, skip the practicals
entirely. The second option is to run what is commonly called “theory

of practicals” sessions. In these sessions, students go through ‘dry
labs’ and learn only the theoretically underpinnings of the scheduled
practical work. These two approaches kill the inquiry spirit of science
and fail to guarantee Africa the development of a crop of high-quality,
Nobel prize-winning scientists. In one breath, we want to advance
rapidly in science and technology, in another breath, we ask our higher
institution teachers to teach science to large numbers of students in
laboratories that cannot accommodate large numbers. How do we
maintain a balance in this context? Experts at the Regional Workshop
on Higher Education at Moi University in Kenya and at a similar
workshop in Lagos State University, Nigeria reached agreement on
these strategies:
Cooperative Group Work
In a large class, assigning a set of materials to individual students for

practical work is hardly feasible. Grouping students in the laboratory or
workshop becomes an attractive option. Setting up groups is not as
easy as some think. It is not enough to randomly assign students to
groups without some defined criteria. Studies e.g. Okebukola (1992);
Johnson and Johnson (1996) have shown that cooperative-learning
groups perform better in science practical skills than individualistic and
competitive groups. In setting up cooperative-learning groups,
researchers have suggested mixing on the basis of ability level, gender
and other discriminating variables. How do you achieve this? The
following steps could serve as a guide.
• From the class list, group the students into high, average and low
ability in terms of performance in your subject. The ability levels can
be determined using previous test scores and labelling those
students who are in the upper third as high ability, those in the
bottom third as low ability and the middle two-thirds as average
ability. Indicate H, A, and L to representing high, average and low,
in front of the names of the students on the class list.
• Indicate M and F in front of every name on the class list.
• Compose the groups to include (as much as possible) at least one
high ability, two average ability and one low ability student. Also
have at least one female student in the group.
• Give students the guidelines for group work. These should include
asking every member of the group to contribute his or her idea to
experimental work and to decision making in the group. Inform
them that it is a ‘sink or swim together’ situation and that group
reward is for all and not for individual members. A score of 5 for the
group will be the score for each and every member.
Use of the stations approach
This technique assumes that materials and equipment are available

only for a small fraction of the students and that all experiments for
the semester should be carried out by every student. After checking
out the functioning equipment for each experiment, the teacher
proceeds to set these up as “work stations”. Thus, every station is
dedicated to a specific experiment. If there are seven experiments
listed for the semester in say, a physics course, there will be seven
stations, clearly labelled in the physics laboratory. What next? The next
thing is to prepare a practical time-table for the use of the laboratory.
If each station is to be used by three students, only 21 students are
then scheduled for practical work at a time. Two of such sessions can
be held in a day. Thus, 42 students will have practical experience in a
day. Yet, we have 75 students. This means we have to run the sessions
on two days. The third thing to do is to assign students to stations and

to sessions and to paste the roster. The station’s approach is ready to
run! Will the sessions run automatically? Definitely not. The teacher
and the technicians need to set up every station before the start of
every practical session. They also need to monitor progress of the
students during the practical sessions. And of course, grade lab notes
of the students after each practical session.
The Rotary Approach
This is similar to the station’s approach except that the same set of
experiment is carried out every practical session. The rotating aspect
is the student group. In the engineering workshop with equipment for
10 student groups, but with 30 student groups to contend with,
students will do the same experiment in three groups. Time-table
schedule will need to be developed by the teacher indicating student
allotment to groups and when which group will undertake their
practicals in the workshop. It is often useful to keep a set of equipment
as backup in an event of breakage or damage. The number of students
in each group should be small (between 2 and 4) to enhance greater
student contact with experimental materials. The advantage of the
rotary approach over the stations’ approach is the greater ease of set-
up and monitoring. In the rotary approach, the lecturer and technical
assistants deal with a uniform set of equipment at a time and are able
to follow progress of students in the groups using the same set of
criteria. Independent work is fostered in the stations approach. This
gives it an edge over the rotary approach.
Use of Projects
Practical work for a large number of students can be turned into a good
avenue for enquiry and for developing scientific skills. Rather than run
all the practicals designed for a course in a straight-jacket, cookbook-
like way, we can denote some of the experiments as projects. In this
case, students have to proceed in an open-ended way using problem-
solving approaches. They design and implement their own plans for
addressing the research questions and take ownership of their
procedures and results. Students have to look for their materials and
may acquire improvisation skills in the process. Thus, while some of
the experiments for the course can be designed by the teacher and
implemented using the co-operative-learning group, station and rotary
approaches, some others can be in the form of projects assigned to
students.
Sharing Resources with Nearby Institutions
If there is a neighbouring institution with facilities that can be used for

your practicals, then collaboration will be the answer to running
practicals for your large class. Collaboration requires agreement on
time-tabling and the terms of use of space and equipment. If the
collaborating institution is also battling with large classes in the course,
then mutual benefit results. They share what you have and you share
what they have. What will need to be worked out include when to use,
what to use, how to use, how to transport students to the laboratory or
workshop in the nearby institution, and inventory taking. If cost is
involved (usually the case) for the use of the facility, then this needs to
be sorted out during the planning process.
Demonstration
With acute shortage of equipment and materials in the face of large

numbers of students, demonstration is an option for practical work,
maybe not the best. There could be four types of demonstration-
teacher demonstration, student demonstration, teacher-student
demonstration, student-student demonstration and guest
demonstration. In teacher demonstration, it is the teacher that
presents the experiment to the class while a student who had
practised the experiment conducts the student demonstration. You
may wish to consider asking a woman in the class to lead the
demonstration. Or a disabled student who has agreed to lead. In the
teacher-student model, two people are on stage - the teacher and a
student; while two students (male and female preferably) conduct the
student-student demonstration. A guest teacher can also be requested
to present the demonstration of the experiment to the class.
Try out the approaches to practical work

suggested above. From your record of the
Activity 5.5  effectiveness of the approaches, rank them in
the order of suitability for your needs, objectives
of the course and preference of your students.
Promoting Equity in Large Classes
When conducting large classes, we should give consideration to

promoting equity along the lines of gender and physical and learning
disabilities. More often than not, inequity is accentuated in large
classes and disadvantaged groups tend to suffer inattention leading to
learning problems. In a large class with few women, the sheer number
of men tends to reduce to the barest minimum, the chances of class
participation of the women if not deliberately induced by the lecturer.
Disabled students are often sidelined and given scant attention in a
large class of ‘normal’ students. Low ability students can also be buried
in the crowd. The message here is that the lecturer needs to recognise
that his or her class is mixed in terms of student characteristics and
efforts need to be made to engender participation of all categories of
students. This will mean identifying such groups and making deliberate
efforts to involve them in class work- in asking and answering
questions, in group work and in leading discussions. (Please refer to
Modules 9 and 10 for techniques for empowering women and students
with special learning needs).
Teaching Large Classes
Introduction
Large classes are not necessarily less effective than smaller

ones, but they do require more conscious effort and planning. Like
other classes, large classes work best when students take an active
interest in the subject, and when teachers personalise their
presentation. However, while these basic principles of good teaching
apply in large as well as small classes, the sheer number of students in
a large class can magnify some problems that might be much more
manageable in a smaller class. For example, an occasional late student
or two in a class of forty is not a big problem--and if one student comes
late to class repeatedly, it is easy for the teacher to initiate a
conversation after class to find a way to resolve the problem. In a class
of four hundred, however, late students can be more plentiful and
disruptive. They could also be more elusive after class.
At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
• provide a variety of experiences for students in a

large-class setting;
Prince Jamil Wasajja SPECIFIC 50

OBJECTIVES
• acquire skills of making a large class more interactive;
• present a lecture in a productive way to a large class; and
• evaluate a large class with little stress.
Teaching Large Classes
A teacher with responsibility for teaching a large class, will find the
following tips useful.
Be organised
Large classes require more advance preparation and structure than

small classes. Lapses in the flow of the class, while collecting thoughts
or locating instructional materials, can result in loss of student
attention. Before the course begins, prepare or identify a variety of
instructional aids, demonstrations, and activities to support each
meeting of the class. Prepare a syllabus that includes outlines for each
class meeting, all project and activity descriptions, and handouts for
the entire course. Provide structure to the content, and use the
structure to organise each lesson. Inform the students of that
structure. Taking roll or distributing materials during class is not
recommended for large class situations. Student materials or
instructions needed for a specific class should be made available prior
to class or located so that students may obtain them with as little
disruption as possible.
Connect with your students
It is important to appear approachable in large classes. Build rapport

with your students, and recognise the individuality of each student.
Move among them when talking. Increase student access to you by
getting to class early to listen to their questions, comments, or
complaints. Begin by inviting students to call out something they know
or recall about a topic. Display the responses as an introduction to the
day's activities. Address some of the anonymity students feel in large
classes. Try to learn some names, and call on those you know by
name. Learn something about as many students as possible. Ask for a
few volunteers each day to help with demonstrations and activities and
throughout this process learn some student names.
Provide a variety of experiences
It is appropriate to vary the type of instruction in large classes to

encourage discussion, interaction, and involvement. Do not attempt to
lecture the entire period. Actively involve students during at least a
small part of every class meeting. Form groups of three or four to
discuss a problem or work on a task for a few minutes. Have a question
and answer period at the beginning or end of each class.
Encourage participation
Be aware that students are often reluctant to ask or respond to

questions in large classes, and it is often very difficult to hear their
comments in large lecture halls. Try to be accepting of all questions
and responses from students, and paraphrase or repeat every question
or response. Provide hand-held microphones if acoustics are poor.
Invite students to write questions or comments on index cards and
give them to you at the end of class. Increase the wait time after you
ask a question. Encourage students to indicate in some way when the
pace of the class is too fast or too slow.

Obtain and use feedback
Students in large classes are often reluctant to communicate

difficulties they are having with a course or the teaching strategies.
Employ informal assessment techniques frequently to obtain student
perceptions and suggestions. Use this information as a basis for
making small changes in your teaching behaviour before the course is
completed. Inform your students if you make a change as a result of
their suggestions. Hold weekly meetings with teaching assistants, or
small groups of students, to discuss student reactions to your teaching
and the course. Ask individual students after each class meeting how
the course is progressing. Provide a suggestion box, or have an
envelope attached to your office door where students may leave
comments about you or the course.
Create a Small-Class Atmosphere in a Large-Class Setting
One of the challenges of large classes is overcoming the anonymity

and distance that can exist between teacher and students. If students
are to be actively involved in and feel personal accountability for the
learning process, they must be more than anonymous spectators and
passive recipients of information. In order to facilitate discussion,
feedback, and active learning, the teachers of large classes can work
to create the kind of group identity and individual rapport that make
smaller classes so effective and enjoyable. The following techniques
can foster a more comfortable and productive learning environment in
large classes.
• Learn students' names. You may not be able to learn all the
names, but even learning some will help.
• Use a microphone. Not being able to hear clearly will exclude
students from the lecture.

• Move around the classroom or lecture hall. Standing behind
a podium emphasises the distance between you and the class.
On the other hand, moving into the aisles and around the room
makes the class seem smaller and encourages student
involvement.
• Elicit student feedback about the course. Have students
meet in groups to provide feedback about the course. Other
options include using a mid-semester student feedback activity
or informal discussions with students to learn their reactions to
and suggestions for the class.
Personalise: Learn and use the names of your students, even in a

large class. As difficult as this is, it goes a long way toward
personalising the class.
Include Active Learning Strategies: This can be done by using 2-

minute dyad discussion groups, asking students to share personal
experiences related to course content, formalising study groups, giving
group assignments, using peer feedback groups, and asking students
to write answers to discussion questions before class begins.
Give feedback early and often: Students need to know how they
are doing, particularly in a large class. After every fifteen minutes of
lecturing, ask students to discuss a thought question with the person
next to them and have two or three students tell their response to the
whole class. After lecturing for half the class, ask students to write the
most important themes you have mentioned; write your answers on
the overhead and let them compare their lists with yours.
In a large class, the teacher must change the method of teaching to

accommodate the number of students. Here are some suggestions to
make large classes more interactive:
• Present the subject in a way that it will be of lasting

interest to students. Use examples students will
understand e.g. examples that involve current issues or
situations they can relate to.
• Have students make group presentations on a topic

covered in class or of particular interest to them, followed
by questions and discussion. Encourage creativity and
originality.
Lecturing Large Classes
Many teachers settle for the lecture method when faced with a large
class. To them, it is the line of least resistance! While some present the
lecture in a rather dull manner, some make their lectures exciting.
Here are a few things teachers who succeed with lecturing large
classes do.
• Plan the lecture so that you do not talk for the whole time:
twenty-minute spells are quite long enough. Intersperse your
presentation with active learning techniques; questions for the
students to talk about with their neighbours; two-minute ‘stand
up, stretch and breathe’ sessions; time for students to review
their notes (or perhaps to review each other's notes); Use a
variety of media: e.g. slides overhead projector, handouts, and
video clips. All of these help to break up the monotony that
accompanies even the best presenter who talks too long.
• Students like lecturers who explain things clearly. So:

• Don’t rush.
• Do repeat yourself, preferably varying the words.
• If possible use examples, similes and metaphors.
• Make connections with ‘real life’, if possible.
• Humour is appreciated. This is a hard one to get right, but is -
thankfully - not compulsory. Some people begin presentations with a
couple of prepared jokes or stories.
• Unless the projection of your overhead transparencies is so poor,

assume students can read. You do not have to read out all the
words on your transparency.
Keep the number of transparencies small rather than large, and

try to limit the number of points on each transparency - a rule of
six slides, each with no more than six points, has been
suggested.
• It is possible, even with 800 students, to ask and to invite

questions. Some lecturers plant questions in the audience so as
to ease things along.
When asking, wait for answers, look around the audience, repeat
the question, ask the questioner’s name and thank him or her.
When receiving questions, again repeat them for all to hear.
• Taking and asking questions means less information can be
covered although better understanding should result. Have some
sense of what you might do if questioning throws you seriously
off-course.
• Handouts and support materials can list key points and

connections; contain an outline of the lecture; draw attention to

terms to be learned and to recommended reading.
Implementing good practices in teaching large classes
• Organise your lectures carefully, but try to deliver them

without detailed notes so that you can maintain eye contact
and get cues from students as to their understanding.
• Give students frequent short assignments and quizzes so that
you and they will know whether they are understanding the
material.
• Do not make assumptions. Write out and define not only
technical terms but other words or expressions with which the
students may not be familiar.
• Try to refrain from such comments as, "Now, I know you all
know this" (many of them do not). Or "You do not know this?"
(which makes them feel stupid).
• Intersperse your lectures with questions to students; this
makes them active participants in learning.
• Leave the last five minutes for student questions; try taking
several questions at once and responding to them with a mini-
lecture.
• Return papers and marked examination scripts promptly and
review them at the next class meeting.
• Keep a journal or log of what explanations, techniques, or
assignments worked well and share these with colleagues
teaching the same or similar courses.
• Get feedback from students once or twice during the
semester by asking them to write on two or three questions,
such as "What is the most significant thing you have learned
in this course so far?" "What, if anything, is still unclear?" or

"What suggestions do you have for improving the course?"
• Acknowledge student feedback at the next class meeting and
indicate which changes you can and which you cannot make
and why.
• Sit in on courses taught by those of your colleagues you know
to be especially effective teachers to see what other ideas or
techniques you can pick up.
Making Exercises Count in Large Classes
A technique you can count on when teaching a large class is the

in-class exercise. As you lecture or go through a problem solution,
instead of just posing questions to the class as a whole and enduring
the ensuing time-wasting silences, occasionally assign a task and give
the students anywhere from 30 seconds to five minutes to come up
with a response. Anything can serve as a basis for these exercises,
including the same questions you normally ask in lectures and perhaps
some others that might not be part of your current repertoire.
In the exercises you might sometimes ask the students to write
responses individually, sometimes to work in pairs or groups of three,
and sometimes to work alone and then to form pairs and combine and
improve their individual responses. ("think-pair-share"). The more you
vary your methods, the more interesting the class tends to be.
Whichever approach you use for the exercises (individual, pairs,
groups, or think-pair-share), at least some of the time you should call
on groups or individuals to present what they came up with, perhaps
landing disproportionately on students near the back of the room so
they know they cannot hide from you there. If you never do this,
students will have little incentive to work on the exercises when you
assign them and many would not, but if they think they may be called
on, they would not want to be embarrassed and so you will get 90+
percent of them actively involved in what you are teaching.
The principal benefit of these exercises is that they get students
acting and reflecting, two important ways by which we learn. The
students who succeed in a task will own the knowledge in a way they
never could if you simply handed it to them, and those who try and fail
will be receptive to discovering what they did not know. Group
exercises have the added benefit of giving students an opportunity to
meet and work with one another, a good first step towards building a
sense of community. (You can augment this benefit by periodically
asking the students to sit in different locations and work with students
they have not been with before.)
You can also use in-class exercises to wrap up a lecture period.
Ask the students to write down and hand in a brief statement of the
main point of the lecture, or come up with two good questions or test
problems related to what you just presented, or tell you how they think
you could improve the class. You can scan their responses and quickly
see if they got the main idea you were trying to present, identify their
main points of confusion, or discover things you could do that would
make the class better for them, like giving more examples or leaving
material on the board longer or speaking more slowly.
Other Techniques
• Prepare handouts far enough ahead of time to make sure that

they will be ready for the class in which they will be used.
• After you have taught the course enough times to be

comfortable with your lecture notes, consider having them
duplicated and bound and given out to students. You need to
ensure periodic updates of the notes. Leave gaps in the notes
to be filled in during class or by the students in or out of class,
sprinkle the notes with questions about the contents, promise
the students that some of the gaps and questions will show up
on the tests, and keep your promise. The students will then
actually read the notes.
• If you hand out notes or provide a coursepack, do not spend

the lecture hours simply going over all the derivations,
explanations, etc., for the students to follow along. You are
guaranteed to put them to sleep like that. Instead, use the
time to go over the conceptually difficult points, provide
additional examples, fill in some of the gaps and answer some
of the questions in the notes, and carry out some of the active
learning exercises.
• To minimise the number of times you have to answer the

same questions, encourage students to come to your office
hours in groups. If you find yourself answering the same
questions repeatedly, create FAQ (frequently asked questions)
file with your responses and insert it in subsequent replies.
• Make sure that each part of an assignment or test is graded

by only one grader so you do not have to deal with two
students getting different grades for the identical response.
Out-of-class Group Assignments
When you are teaching a class of 160 students and you give
individual homework weekly, that's 160 papers to grade every week. If
the students complete the assignments in teams of four and only one
solution is handed in by each team, that is 40 papers to grade every
week. The difference has a major impact on the feasibility of collecting
homework at all. Unless you have a squadron of teaching assistants,
there is no good way to deal with 160 papers every week, and most
lecturers in this situation either give up on collecting homework (which
is a pedagogical disaster), confine themselves to multiple-choice
problems that require either memorisation or rote substitution, or
grade superficially enough for the homework to lose most of its
educational value. Even if there are enough teaching assistants to do
the job, maintaining quality control on the grading of hundreds of
assignments is next to impossible.
Getting students to work on assignments in fixed teams relieves
the grading problem but introduces another set of problems, most of
which have to do with the fact that the students in a group may have
widely varying levels of ability, work ethics, and sense of responsibility.
If a lecturer simply tells students to get into groups and do the work,
more harm than good may result. In some groups, one or two students
will actually do the work and the others will simply go along for the
ride. In other groups, the students will parcel out the work and staple
the individual products together, with each student understanding only
one-fourth of the assignment.
To minimise the likelihood of these situations occurring, the
lecturer must structure the assignments to assure that the defining
conditions of cooperative learning are met: (1) positive
interdependence (if one team member fails to meet his or her
responsibilities, everyone loses in some way); (2) individual
accountability (each student is held personally accountable for his or
her part and for everyone else's part as well); (3) face-to-face
interaction, at least part of the time; (4) development and appropriate
use of teamwork skills (leadership, time management, effective
communication, and conflict resolution, to name a few), and (5)
periodic self-assessment of group functioning (What are we doing well
as a group? What do we need to do differently?)
Individual accountability is promoted by testing individuals on all
of the material covered in group assignments and by factoring
individual effort assessments into team project grading. Positive
interdependence is fostered by assigning rotating roles to team
members (coordinator, recorder, checker), and by offering small
bonuses on tests to all members of teams with average test grades
above (say) 80.
Using Multiple-Choice Assessment in Large Classes
Since multiple-choice questions are amenable to speedy marking or

grading, they are well-suited for use in large classes. Efforts should
however be made to minimise, indeed, eliminate cheating. After the
examination is taken, students can exchange their scripts in a random
manner and made to mark. This ensures early feedback to the
students on how well or how badly they have done. Also to the teacher
on the level of success or failure of the class on the topics covered by
the test.
Other Assessment Techniques
Suggestions include:
• The use of Classroom Assessment Techniques to give both
students and you an idea of their achievements
• Self-assessment, which is best done with reference to known
criteria and which leads to the student identifying areas for
attention.
• Peer-assessment. As with self-assessment. This can be a very
good way of giving students feedback on drafts of essays,
reports, case-study responses, law case analyses etc.
The three suggestions above have faster (and probably better)
feedback built in to them. Other ways of giving rapid feedback include:
• Student self-assessment sheets. These are returned with
comments written on them. That might amount to just one
phrase - ‘I agree’.
• Work is returned accompanied by a standardised, tick-list
feedback sheet. Free form comments are kept to a minimum.
• In student presentations, all other students comment, preferably
using a set of known criteria, and the comments are returned
immediately and directly to the students making the
presentation.
• Unless it is vital to correct errors, concentrate on giving feedback
about points for improvement that can be applied to the next
piece of work. It may feel very noble to write comments all over
a piece of work, but it seems that students want perhaps two,
good pointers towards getting a better grade next time, not lots
of detailed comment.
Summary and Conclusion
We began a study of this module by arriving at an operational

definition of a large class. We stated that for the purpose of study of
this module, we suggest that a large class is one that feels large. Signs
that the class is ‘large’ can be:
• The class is significantly larger than you are used to.
• The resources can no longer cope with the number of students if
you desire individual attention for the students.
We identified some of the problems of large classes as:
• Students become faces instead of people
• It is harder to give individual advice and guidance to students
• Organisational problems are compounded, making it difficult to

schedule tutorials, laboratory sessions, and fieldwork
• There can be technical problems working with large classes e.g.
difficulties in projecting slides that are clearly visible to all
students.
• Monitoring of attendance can be difficult, thus encouraging
students to cut classes
• Coping with large numbers of assignments and examination
scripts is a source of difficulty
• The quality of feedback to students can be much reduced in
large classes.
In spite of these difficulties, we found practices that are disposing to

meaningful learning in large classes. For practical work, these
practices include:
• Cooperative Group Work

• Use of the stations approach
• The Rotary Approach
• Use of Projects
• Sharing Resources with Nearby Institutions
• Demonstration
We also described how the large class can be organised for greater
student-material-teacher interaction and the issue of assessment in
large classes.
Teaching a large class effectively is hard work, but it is possible to do it

even if you are not a big-league entertainer. If you make the necessary
logistical arrangements far enough in advance, provide plenty of active
learning experiences in the classroom instead of relying on straight

lecturing, and take full advantage of the power of teams in both in-
class and out-of-class work, large classes can come close to being as
educationally rewarding as small classes.
Reference
Baldwin, Roger G. (1995). “Faculty Collaboration in Teaching.”
Improving
teaching. Bolton, Massachusetts: Anker.
Feinberg, W. (1992). School and Society (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers
College
Council (Education) of the European Union (2002), “Detailed work

programme on the follow-up of the objectives of Education and training
systems in Europe”, OJ C 142, 14 June 2002.
Boyd, D., P. Grossman, H. Lankford, S. Loeb, and J. Wyckoff,

(2008), “Who Leaves? Teacher Attrition and Student Achievement”,
NBER Working Paper No. 14022, May 2008.
Rockoff, J. (2004), “The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student

Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data”, American Economic Review
Proceedings, No. 92 (2), pp. 247-252.
Ashton, P. and N. Webb (1986), Making a Difference: Teacher
Efficacy and Student Achievement, Monogram, Longman, White Plains,
New York.
OECD (1998), Staying Ahead: In-Service Training and Teacher

Professional Development, OECD, Paris.

Effective Teaching

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effective Teaching

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KAMPALA UNIVERSITY

Prince Jamil Wasajja

Furthermore they can be expected to mediate the effects of job-related

Effective teaching as a result of professional development

Professional development is generally associated with more (reported)

Prince Jamil Wasajja 2

It should be noted that, although teacher background variables

In many countries, professional development is more and more

From the perspective of education policy, however, it is even more

In PISA, it is positively related to the school’s mean student

BELIEFS ABOUT THE NATURE OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

The direct transmission view of student learning implies that a

Prince Jamil Wasajja 7

It is important to note the difference between beliefs on the one hand,

Direct transmission beliefs about teaching

Constructivist beliefs about teaching

Learning Styles as a factor in Effective Teaching and Learning

Prince Jamil Wasajja 8

Approaches to Learning and Orientations to Studying.

Prince Jamil Wasajja 9

Learning and Teaching Styles:

The ways in which an individual characteristically acquires, retains, and

Serious mismatches may occur between the learning styles of students

Instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile

1. Which aspects of learning style are particularly significant in foreign

Dimensions of Learning Style

Sensing and Intuitive Learners

Sensors tend to be concrete and methodical, intuitors to be abstract

Moody (1988) administered the MBTI to 491 college language students

Ehrman and Oxford (1990) studied learning strategies and teaching

Basic language instruction that involves a great deal of repetitive drill

The sensors, in particular, maythen start to fall behind and do poorly

Prince Jamil Wasajja 14

Visual and Verbal Learners

This categorization is somewhat unconventional in the context of the

Direct access is possible when words are familiar or when artificial

Most people extract and retain more information from visual

Recent studies of learning styles in foreign language education (e.g.,

Active and Reflective Learners

An active learner is someone with more of a natural tendency toward

Language classes in which all students are relegated to passive roles,

Sequential and Global Learners

Many authors who have done research on cognitive or learning styles

Oxford (1990) proposes that this learning style dimension can be

Pedagogical Implications and Potential Misuses of Learning

Prince Jamil Wasajja 20

The optimal teaching style is a balanced one that sometimes matches

What about identifying individual students' learning styles and sharing

Questions about learning styles

APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND ORIENTATIONS TO STUDYING

To them, studying means scouring their texts for worked-out examples

They have an intrinsic motivation to learn, with intellectual curiosity

A student may adopt different approaches to learning in different

The strongest inclination of the students was toward a strategic

There are similarities between orientations to studying and learning

Deep Approach to Learning

Well-established instructional strategies can be used to achieve these

Prince Jamil Wasajja 27

Several student-centered teaching approaches accomplish the goal of

Other references provide numerous examples of teaching in a

Inductive and Deductive Learners:

A large percentage of classroom teaching in every subject is primarily

Insofar as foreign languages are concerned, we propose that the