Pedagogical Pattern #8
Lab-Discussion-Lecture-Lab (LDLL) Pattern
(Version 1.0)
Mary Lynn Manns
Univ. of North Carolina at Asheville
Computer Science Department
Asheville, NC 28804 USA
manns@unca.edu
Intent:
Introduce software concepts.
Motivation:
Students often have a difficult time understanding software concepts
which are introduced in a classroom lecture format. This is because the
lecture-lab pedagogy utilizes a "this is what will happen when you do
this" approach which can be too abstract to provide a foundation for
learning software. The LDLL pedagogy offers an alternative approach.
It begins with an introductory step-by-step lab, follows with a
discussion and an explanation of what the students did, and then
reenforces the concepts with a more advanced lab.
Applicability:
Use the Lab-Discussion-Lecture-Lab pattern to introduce a software
tool and/or concepts in a programming language.
Structure:
Lab:
Students complete a step-by-step lab, prepared by the
instructor to introduce the software concepts. This lab must
have detailed written instructions and include questions
which encourage students to record and analyze what they
see on the screen as they proceed through the exercise.
Discussion:
After the lab is completed by each student, the
instructor leads a student-centered discussion of the following:
- the concepts which were unfamiliar to the students as they completed the exercise
- any problems the students encountered (in order to quality control the exercise for future use)
Lecture:
Instructor lectures on the new concepts which were
introduced in the lab, with continuous references to the
experiences the students had while doing the lab.
Lab:
Students complete a more complex lab exercise which
reenforces and examines each student's comprehension of
the new concepts.
Consequences:
The LDLL pattern:
- allows students an active involvement in their learning by introducing them to new concepts as they are using the software
- encourages students to record, and to reflect upon, what happened when they were involved in their learning
- enables instructors to give more concrete, less abstract, lectures
- requires additional work on the part of the instructor to prepare the detailed instructions in the first lab
- may take longer than a lecture-lab pedagogy; however, the increased level of student comprehension seems to decrease the necessity for extensive follow-up and review periods
Implementation:
Issues to consider:
- Lab exercises can be short (covering one or two concepts) or lengthy (covering many concepts). Short lab exercises can be completed during a designated lab period; for more lengthy labs, it is recommended that they be assigned and completed outside regular class hours.
- Since students will be exposed to the new concepts for the first time during the first lab, this lab should be written in a detailed, step-by-step manner and include references to documentation and/or textbook pages where clarification may be obtained.
- The questions which appear throughout the first lab exercise should allow the students to analyze what they enter and what they see on the screen. These questions will then serve to stimulate and lead the discussion session.
- Instructors will find that the lecture session, since it is given after the lab and discussion sessions, will require a much shorter period of time than lectures given in a lecture-lab format.
- The follow-up lab should require analytical skills and test the student's understanding of the concepts. Unlike the first lab, it should be evaluated by the instructor.
Related Patterns:
(none so far)
Example Instances:
This pattern has been used to teach:
- The Smalltalk environment
- Smalltalk programming concepts
- C programming concepts
- BASIC programming concepts
- Fortran programming concepts