Adventures with a Flipped Classroom and a Materials Science and Engineering MOOC : “Fools Go Where Angels Fear to Tread”

Clemens, Bruce M.; Nivargi, Chinmay; Jan, Antony; Lu, Yunhu; Schneider, Emily; Manning, Jane

doi:10.1557/opl.2013.774

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In theory, this allows class-time to be spent answering questions and delving deeper into concepts than would otherwise be possible. A universal conclusion [1][2][3][4][5][6] seems to be that more material can be covered in the flipped format. This does not always appear to lead to improved student learning or mastery of the material, however.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Learning Gate Completion Requirements in a Flipped Classroom

Cavalli¹

2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous work by the author has investigated the implementation of a flipped course structure for a junior-level materials science course. The basic structure of the course includes 1) topical learning modules to be viewed by students before class, 2) discussion/active learning activities during each class meeting and 3) an in-depth term paper and associated presentation on a materials science topic of each student's choosing. Each module nominally corresponds to 1-1.5 hours of lecture material broken into 5-10 minute chunks. Results showed that students in flipped sections of the course demonstrated larger gains in learning over the semester compared to students in a traditional classroom setting. The current work investigates additional details of the flipped structure. Pre-recorded course materials ('learning modules') include lecture segments and short learning assessments ('learning gates'). One cohort of students is required to achieve a minimum score on the learning gates for them to be counted as complete (>80%). A second cohort of students is required only to attempt the learning modules for them to be counted as complete. Both cohorts have the option take the assessments as many times as they desire. This paper compares student performance between the two cohorts throughout the course as well as student impressions of the course format.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A variety of recent publications have reported efforts in flipping classes ranging freshman-level design courses 1,2 , to sophomore-level mechanics 1 and circuits courses 3 , to a variety of upperlevel engineering courses 1,[4][5][6] . Results of the flipped format implementation have been mixed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Learning Gate Completion Requirements in a Flipped Classroom

Cavalli¹

2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the flipped learning format provides various benefits for students and instructors. These benefits can include increased learning gain 3,4 , flexibility [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] , increased interaction with peers and the instructor 6,8,9,12,13,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] , improved professional skills 20,23 , and increased student engagement and preparation 9,13,25,26 . Based, in part, on the potential benefits identified in previous studies, a junior-level transportation engineering course was converted into a flipped format.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Flipped Classroom Approach to Teaching Transportation Engineering

Karabulut‐Ilgu¹,

Yao²,

Savolainen³

et al.

2016 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The flipped classroom approach has gained increasing popularity in higher education, particularly in STEM fields. In flipped learning, part or all of direct instruction is delivered through online videos and other media, and the class time is used for engaging students in collaborative, hands-on activities. In order to utilize the benefits of this novel teaching approach, a junior-level, introduction to transportation engineering course was converted into a flipped format. This study, conducted in a major Midwestern university, will present the results of a mixed-method evaluation investigating the effectiveness of the flipped classroom approach. Quantitative data included a pre-course survey, a post-course survey. Qualitative data, on the other hand, included video recordings of in-class sessions and end-of-semester focus group interviews. Analysis of the results indicated students benefited from the flipped classroom approach although it entailed some challenges for both faculty and students. Conclusions are drawn and recommendations are made for engineering education researchers and practitioners.

show abstract

“…They have also explored variations on the flipped model, comparing student outcomes when course requirements, learning tools, and activities are modified 1 . Investigators who have looked at the amount of content coverage in flipped courses [1][2][3][4][5][6] universally conclude that more material can be covered in the flipped format. It is equally clear, however, that increased content coverage does not always lead to better learning outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent literature related to flipping classes covers a variety of engineering disciplines and course levels including freshman-level design courses [2][3][4] , sophomore-level mechanics 2 and circuits courses 5 , and a variety of upper-level engineering courses 2,[6][7][8] . Results have shown that the efficacy of the flipped format can vary as much as for any other pedagogy style.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of On-Campus and Distance Learning Outcomes in a Flipped Materials Science Course

Cavalli

2016 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student performance in a flipped materials science course is assessed using pre-and posttests as well as a survey of student preferences and perceptions. Both on-campus and at-a-distance learners are included in the study. The general structure of the course and associated learning aids and outcomes is presented. Previous iterations of the course have included comparing flipped and traditional sections of the same course as well as changing requirements on topic quizzes/learning gates associated with recorded material in the flipped structure. In general, students in the flipped version of the course have performed better as measured by pre-and posttests than those in the traditional format. Students who were required to achieve a certain level of performance on topic quizzes reported spending more time with the material but did not necessarily demonstrate a marked improvement on the posttest compared to those who were only required to attempt the quizzes. In the current iteration, two variables are considered, 1) the effect of place for on-campus students (traditional classroom vs. SCALE-UP classroom), and 2) the effect of changing the format of discussion materials for distance students. Results show mixed outcomes with results to gains from pretest to posttest, but distance students tended to score higher on the pretest and show somewhat larger gains from pretest to posttest. Distance students tended to self-report higher confidence on the pretest than their on-campus peers. Their gains were smaller in this area and final reported confidence levels lower than on-campus students. Little effect of classroom setup was evident on performance or reported confidence between the two groups of on-campus students.

show abstract

Adventures with a Flipped Classroom and a Materials Science and Engineering MOOC : “Fools Go Where Angels Fear to Tread”

Cited by 10 publications

References 1 publication

Comparison of Learning Gate Completion Requirements in a Flipped Classroom

Comparison of Learning Gate Completion Requirements in a Flipped Classroom

A Flipped Classroom Approach to Teaching Transportation Engineering

Comparison of On-Campus and Distance Learning Outcomes in a Flipped Materials Science Course

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About