Comparison of student team dynamics between nonflipped and flipped versions of a large‐enrollment sophomore design engineering course

Abstract

Background: This study examined the differences between team dynamics in nonflipped and flipped versions of a multisection team-and project-based sophomore engineering design course. Purpose/Hypothesis: We hypothesized that team dynamics in nonflipped and flipped course settings may reveal differences in student perceptions of team conflict, peer assessment, and team member satisfaction as well as possible relationships among these three variables. Design/Method: Students in both nonflipped and flipped settings completed a web-based Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) SMARTER Teamwork survey. A series of ANCOVAs and path analyses were conducted to gain insights into team dynamics in both course environments. Results: Although no significant differences in team conflict were found, significantly higher levels of team member satisfaction and peer assessment rates were detected in the flipped course. The path analysis revealed relationships among team conflict, team member satisfaction, and peer assessment in both course versions. Differences in relationships among the unidimensional levels of team conflict and the other two variables were found between the nonflipped and flipped versions. Conclusions: The primary pedagogical implication of this research points to the affordance of the flipped course setting in providing sufficient time for student members to become cohesive teams. As part of the student experience, engineering educators are encouraged to allow time for team formation and development in addition to content learning. Instructors should provide guidance that helps teams and individuals understand themselves and others as well as create workflows to support their learning and team management. K E Y W O R D S flipped classroom, peer assessment, team-based learning, team dynamics, team member satisfaction

The innovation level of engineering students’ team projects in hybrid and MOOC environments

“…The US Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology defines a team as a group of individuals of diverse backgrounds, skills, and perspectives, working together toward a common goal (ABET 2016-17). The ability to work effectively as an engaged member of a team, is among the top most important behaviour attributes needed for engineers (ABET 2016-17;Baughman, Hassall, and Xu 2019;Usher and Barak 2018). In engineering courses, working on team projects involving authentic industrial problems is a well-known practice (Barak and Usher 2020;Chen, Kolmos, and Du 2020).…”

“…Teamwork can provide engineering students with a realistic and complex industry-like experience that they are likely to encounter during their professional lives. However, the application of effective teamwork has many challenges (Baughman, Hassall, and Xu 2019;Tseng and Yeh 2013;Usher and Barak 2020). One major challenge is the composition of team members.…”

“…Hybrid courses incorporate traditional in-person classroom meetings with online media-rich instructional components, such as pre-recorded video lectures, interactive ebooks, web-based activities, colourful simulations, and online quizzes. They enable students to learn content outside of classroom at their own pace, while class time can be dedicated to addressing knowledge gaps and teamwork (Baughman, Hassall, and Xu 2019). Another trend in online learning is MOOCsmassive open online courses, which provide learners worldwide the opportunity to access educational contents for free without any commitment or prior requirements.…”

The Factors Predicting Pre-Service Teachers’ Achievement in Teacher Training Classrooms

“…In addition to these, many countries give special attention to courses involving technology in the training of pre-service teachers because they are the individuals who will educate students having different learning styles, motivation, and pre-requisite knowledge to be able to survive in modern society as being reflective, critical, selfdirected learners and good at the use of technology. In this sense, flipped learning was proposed as an active teaching-learning approach to meet the learning needs of nextgeneration students (Baughman, Hassall & Xu, 2019;Castedo, Lopez, Chiquito, Navarro, Cabrera & Ortega, 2019;Maycock, Lambert & Bane, 2018;Ziegelmeier & Topaz, 2015).…”

Effect of Psychological Safety on the Interaction of Students in Teams

“…Asio, Cross, and Ekwaro-Osire [57] found that the perception of teams' innovation differs based on teams' cohesion, conflict, and psychological safety. Teams in flipped classrooms have more satisfaction than non-flipped classroom teams, but they have similar levels of conflict [58]. Albeit psychological safety is a very important team dynamic for increasing team learning and can be used as a proxy for other team dynamics [59], [60], there is a gap in engineering education research to address psychological safety.…”