No abstract

The flipped classroom is a relatively new approach to undergraduate teaching in science. This approach repurposes class time to focus on application and discussion; the acquisition of basic concepts and principles is done on the students' own time before class. While current flipped classroom research has focused on student preferences and comparative learning outcomes, there remains a lack of understanding regarding its impact on students' approaches to learning. Focusing on a new flipped classroom-based course for basic medical sciences students, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate students' adjustments to the flipped classroom, their time on task compared with traditional lectures, and their deep and active learning strategies. Students in this course worked through interactive online learning modules before in-class sessions. Class time focused on knowledge application of online learning module content through active learning methods. Students completed surveys and optional prequiz questions throughout the term to provide data regarding their learning approaches. Our results showed that the majority of students completed their prework in one sitting just before class. Students reported performing less multitasking behavior in the flipped classroom compared with lecture-based courses. Students valued opportunities for peer-peer and peer-instructor interactions and also valued having multiple modes of assessment. Overall, this work suggests that there is the potential for greater educational gains from the flipped classroom than the modest improvements in grades previously demonstrated in the literature; in this implementation of the flipped classroom, students reported that they developed independent learning strategies, spent more time on task, and engaged in deep and active learning.

No abstract

This paper outlines ways to maximize response rates to surveys by summarizing the most relevant literature to date and demonstrating how these techniques have resulted in consistently high rates of return in family practice research. We describe the methodology used in recent surveys of physicians conducted by the Centre for Studies in Family Medicine through its Thames Valley Family Practice Research Unit, located in London, Ontario, Canada and funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The identification and implementation of these techniques to maximize response rates is critical, as primary health care researchers often rely on information gathered through questionnaires to study physicians' practice profiles, experiences and attitudes. Four separate and distinct mailed surveys of physicians using a modified Dillman approach were conducted from 2001 to 2004. The sampling strategies, topics, types of questions and response formats of these surveys varied. The first survey did not use any incentives or recorded delivery/registered mail and received a response rate of 48%. In sharp contrast, the other three surveys obtained responses rates of 76%, 74%, 74%, respectively, achieved through the use of gift certificates and recorded delivery/registered mail. Sending a survey by recorded delivery/registered mail tends to result in the survey package being given priority in the physicians' incoming mail at the practice. Gift certificates partially compensate physicians for time spent completing the survey and recognition of the time required is appreciated. The response rates achieved provide strong evidence to support the use of monetary incentives and recorded delivery/registered mail (along with the Dillman approach) in survey research. It is anticipated that this evidence will be used by other researchers to justify requests for funding to cover the costs associated with incentives and recorded delivery/registered mail. We recommend the use of these strategies to maximize response rates and improve the quality of this type of primary health care research.

No abstract