Tag: pedagogy innovation

  • Group-led didactic teaching – is this novel?

    people in a large lecture theatre

    Have you ever heard of Group-led didactic teaching? What is it? These are questions Professor Andrew Garrard has been considering as he develops the pedagogy behind the Engineering Sheffield ‘Project Weeks’. Called GEC and EYH, they are both core to undergraduate engineering education here at the University of Sheffield, well supported by our industry partners, and provide students the opportunity to develop important engineering skills. If you think you know the answer the questions, check first to see what Andrew thinks.

    The curricula for all our Engineering programmes at the University of Sheffield include “project weeks,” during which approximately 1,500 undergraduate engineering students simultaneously engage with an open-ended design problem.  As we do not have a space large enough for the entire cohort, the students are allocated to multiple teaching areas across the campus. These areas are each staffed for a substantial proportion of the period during which the students are engaged in their work.

    Part of the teaching delivery involves students receiving didactic instruction from staff on defined design methods, such as problem definition and design selection. It is this mode of distributed didactic learning that I am updating. The traditional lecture format, in which academic staff present using pre-prepared slides, is being replaced with a digitally enabled sequence of bite-sized content, steps, and milestones that allows learners to engage with the didactic material independently. This structure is similar to that of a MOOC. However, whereas a MOOC is typically designed for learners working individually and separated physically and temporally from others on the course, this material will be designed for groups working collaboratively. For example, embedded instructions will prompt groups to discuss a topic or to ensure that all members understand a concept before progressing to the next step.

    When exploring the introduction of a new method of learning and teaching, it is standard practice to review previously published literature to understand what has already been attempted and to ensure that any new approach aligns with established best practice. This was my intention when considering an update to the didactic content within the project weeks. However, I have been unable to identify discussion of anything closely aligned with this idea. My search has not been exhaustive, but there comes a point at which the potential value of locating comparable work is outweighed by the time required to uncover it. I suspect part of the problem is not knowing the search terms necessary to uncover appropriate sources.

    This blog post therefore has two aims. First, if any readers are aware of similar published work, I would be grateful to be pointed in the right direction, as collaboration with others exploring related themes is always welcome. Second, if no such work exists, this serves as a way of sharing the concept more broadly.

    If this approach has not been explored before, I will  make the bold claim that I can coin a term for it. After some careful consideration, review of various options, and frustration with ChatGPT “just not getting it,” I’ve settled on:

    Group-Led Didactic Teaching (GLDT)

    The acronym seems to appear primarily in the context of cryptocurrency trading, so with luck there will be minimal overlap—unless, perhaps, one happens to be teaching in a business school. With that noted, let me outline what the term is intended to capture.

    How is GLDT different from other modes of teaching?

    There are well-established methods for delivering didactic teaching. These include synchronous lectures delivered by academic staff and asynchronous lectures, which are usually provided remotely. A range of digital learning approaches also exists, such as massive open online courses (MOOCs), which present taught material in small, self-contained units.

    A synchronous, in-person lecture offers the social benefit of a shared learning experience, but it restricts all students to a single pace of delivery. In contrast, an asynchronous lecture allows learners to engage with the material at a time and speed that suits them, though it lacks opportunities for social interaction. Asynchronous lectures can also be produced quickly as an alternative when in-person teaching is not possible, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, or to support learners who have missed a session.

    MOOCs use a similar delivery format to asynchronous remote lectures, but they are designed specifically for fully remote learners. They typically provide short, focused segments of content along with multiple in-course milestones or formative assessments.

    My approach to Group-Led Didactic Teaching applies a MOOC-style structure to the design and delivery of content for learners who attend scheduled sessions and work in assigned groups to complete learning tasks. This model combines the social interaction of an in-person, communal lecture with the flexibility for each group to set its own pace. It is also scalable across multiple rooms on campus.

    GLDT differs from a typical tutorial. Tutorials usually do not include tasks designed specifically for groups, and they often focus on problem sets that test the application of knowledge rather than the learning of new didactic content. In addition, learners in tutorials commonly work on different parts of the curriculum and seek help on varying topics, depending on which aspects of the material they are experiencing difficulty. In GLDT sessions, all learners engage with the same material and are expected to achieve the.

    GLDT is a form of group work, which is a widely used teaching method. However, most forms of group work involve student-led or group-led learning for open-ended design challenges, in which students are given a problem brief and follow a process to produce varied, undefined outcomes. For example, in a design project, each student or group develops its own solution to the problem. This approach differs from the delivery of didactic taught material, where all students are expected to reach the same defined learning outcomes.

     Intended learningStaffingPace settingSocial interactionScale up limits
    Synchronous, in person lectureDidactic content1 lecturer per lectureStaffYesTheater size
    Asynchronous remote lectureDidactic content1 lecturer per recordingLearnerNoUnlimited
    MOOCDidactic contentAcademics to design, then reuse.LearnerNoUnlimited
    TutorialsFormative assessmentTeaching assistantsLearnerYes (optionally)Number of Rooms/TAs
    GroupworkOpen ended problemsTeaching assistantsGroupYes (mandatory)Number of Rooms/TAs
    GLDTDidactic contentOptional Teaching assistantsGroupYes (mandatory)Number of Rooms/TAs

    So what do you think? Is it new? Do you do any teaching of this nature? Let us know via Linkedin, we’d love to hear from you about this.

    When citing this work, please use the following citation:

    Garrard, A. (2025). “Group-led didactic teaching – is this novel?”. Centre for Engineering Education Blog, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. February 2026. https://ceesheffield.co.uk/2026/10/27/group-leddidacticteaching/

  • Teaching with a Twist: Star Wars, Science, and Student Confidence

    Teaching with a Twist: Star Wars, Science, and Student Confidence

    In this blog, Marsya Ali profiles Dr Julian Dean, Senior Lecturer in Materials Science at the University of Sheffield and winner of the University’s Education Award for Teaching Practice in Engineering and Overall. The blog explores Julian’s approach to making engineering education engaging and accessible, from developing interactive virtual experiments through FlashyScience to using humour, creative examples and accessible language to help students understand complex concepts.

    When Dr Julian Dean was named winner of the University of Sheffield Education Award for Teaching Practice in Engineering and Overall, he described it as “really nice to be recognised.” But for Julian, a Senior Lecturer in Materials Science, the award wasn’t the goal. “I would have done [these things] without the award there,” he says. “It’s nice to know that it’s been seen as good practice.”

    Teaching Practice (Engineering) and Overall winner for teaching practice

    That practice includes everything from playing a guitar power chord to open lectures, to giving lectures with titles like The Phantom Error. But behind the humour is a clear pedagogical goal: to create experiences that engage students on their own terms, whether that’s through themed worksheets, accessible language, or interactive virtual labs.

    Julian’s standout contribution, FlashyScience, exemplifies this approach. Co-developed as a virtual lab platform that enables students to experiment at their own pace, Dr Joanna Bates described it as “revolutionising learning and solidifying understanding in engineering and science.” Combined with his outreach work, visual storytelling, and ever-evolving use of digital tools, it’s no surprise Julian’s approach resonates—not just with students, but with colleagues across the Faculty.

    FlashyScience: A lab beyond the classroom

    FlashyScience began as a school outreach project, driven by a simple question: how far could you stretch students beyond the curriculum? Co-founded with Professor Dan Allwood, the idea grew from a series of in-person STEM sessions into a spin-out company offering fully interactive virtual experiments.

    Screen shot of a virtual tensile tester experiment set up from the Flashy Science website
    The FlashyScience virtual ‘tensile test’ experiment

    At the heart of FlashyScience is accessibility. Giving learners the chance to experiment at their own pace, repeat processes without risk, and explore concepts far beyond GCSE level. From simulating tensile testing to observing radioactive decay across decades, students can interact with complex ideas in a safe, self-guided environment. It’s used by schools and universities alike, including in Sheffield’s undergraduate teaching.

    For some students, the platform has helped build confidence, especially those who might otherwise hesitate in physical lab spaces. “This has allowed a completely flat playing field,” Julian says. “Everyone can do it in their own time, at their own pace… and they get a bit more confidence about that.”

    Making Lectures Memorable

    Julian’s lectures are anything but ordinary. From The Phantom Error to festive worksheets on Santa stuck in a chimney, his sessions weave engineering concepts into familiar pop culture and playful scenarios. “It’s just really silly,” he says, “but the students seem to love it.”

    presentation slide for mechanical properties of materials

    What started as a way to make sessions more engaging has become part of his teaching identity. During COVID, unsure how to begin recorded lectures, Julian decided to open each one with a guitar power chord—a choice that quickly became a student favourite.

    These elements aren’t just for show. They help students stay alert, connect with the content, and enjoy the learning process. “If you enjoy something, you’ll do it,” he explains—a principle that underpins his approach to making technical content memorable and accessible.

    Accessible Teaching: Simplified Language, Not Simplified Ideas

    Julian often uses simple analogies to make abstract concepts easier to grasp such as comparing atoms in a lattice to people holding hands: break the link, and the surrounding bonds might shift, redistribute, or even fall apart.

    This approach is especially useful for international students, who may be processing both scientific content and unfamiliar colloquialisms. By avoiding jargon, Julian ensures ideas remain accessible without being oversimplified, helping all students engage with confidence, regardless of background.

    Teaching That Thinks Like a Student

    Whether he’s building virtual labs or weaving pop culture into problem sets, Julian’s focus is always the same: thinking about how students learn best. “Not everyone learns in the same way,” he says. A reminder that accessibility and creativity aren’t add-ons, but core to effective teaching.

    That mindset is shaping what’s next. Starting this September and in partnership with the IOM3 and Discover Materials, first-year students in Materials Science will design their own outreach resources, from videos to podcasts, aimed at helping schoolteachers explain materials concepts. “They can pick five-year-olds if they really want a challenge,” Julian says. “Or 18-year-olds from college.”

    Students will choose everyday objects that interest them, from hockey sticks to climbing shoes, and link those to real-world materials science and school-level syllabuses. It’s part of a new collaboration with the Institute of Materials, Minerals & Mining (IOM3).

    It’s the same philosophy that runs through all of Julian’s work: teaching that meets students where they are, sparks curiosity, and gives them tools to go further.

    This is the first in a series of profiles of Engineering teaching staff at the University by Marsya Ali.

    When citing this work, please use the following citation:
    Ali, M (2025). “Teaching with a Twist: Star Wars, Science, and Student Confidence” Centre for Engineering Education Blog, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. July 2025.
    https://ceesheffield.co.uk/2026/10/29/teaching-with-a-twist-star-wars-science-and-student-confidence/