Effectiveness of flipped classroom instructional model in teaching pharmaceutical calculations

Cotta, Karyn I.; Shah, Sujay; Almgren, Michaela M.; Macias-Moriarity, Lilia Z.; Mody, Vicky

doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2016.06.011

Cited by 65 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…13 Cotta and colleagues showed that after implementing flipped classroom intervention, students scored significantly higher on the final exam than students in lecture (4.2 point increase). 15 Finally, Wilson and colleagues found that students in the flipped model scored 6.1 percentage points higher than students in the lecture course ( p,.01). Similar to the meta-analytic results for final examination scores, there was no significant difference (Table 4 and Figure 3) between final numeric course scores when comparing the flipped classroom to lecture (WMD51.26, 95% CI:-2.07-4.59, p5.46).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes Comparing Flipped Classroom and Lecture

Gillette

Rudolph

Kimble

et al. 2018

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

139

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To examine the evidence of the effectiveness of flipped classroom compared to traditional lecture. Methods. Experimental and observational studies were included and obtained through searches of PubMed, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Google Scholar. Publications from January 1, 2000 through July 1, 2017 were included. Studies were eligible for this research if: (a) the study compared student outcomes using flipped classroom versus lecture and (b) at least one outcome measure was final examination score or final course score. This analysis used a random effects model with weighted mean difference (WMD) as the outcome. Results. Six studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and five were included in the quantitative synthesis. To date, there has only been one prospective randomized comparison of flipped classroom to lecture in student pharmacist education. When comparing final examination scores, there was no significant difference between flipped classroom and lecture based instruction. Only two studies examined the effect of flipped classroom compared to lecture on final course score. This analysis also found no significant difference. Conclusion. Despite a lack of prospective randomized studies, findings from this meta-analysis suggest that flipped classroom may be associated with minimal gains in student knowledge compared to lecture. These findings are important because previous research has estimated that the flipped classroom requires more time to develop and implement. Future studies using prospective randomized designs need to be conducted before widespread adoption.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,5,6,[13][14][15] Six studies compared flipped classroom to lecture on final examination scores, of which two examined the final numeric course score. Among the six included studies, one was a prospective, parallel-group randomized controlled trial that compared flipped classroom to lecture.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes Comparing Flipped Classroom and Lecture

Gillette

Rudolph

Kimble

et al. 2018

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

139

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the 15 published journal articles that document quantitative results in 2016, ranging from disciplines such as elementary mathematics, statistics, economics, medicine, radiology, pharmacy, and nursing; mixed results have been reported with regard to positive effects from the implementation of a flipped learning pedagogic strategy. Eight cases report significant performance increases due to flipped learning (Olitsky & Cosgrove, ; Lai, & Hwang, ; O'Connor et al, ; Peterson, ; Harris, Harris, Reed, & Zelihic, ; Giuliano & Moser, ; Cotta, Shah, Almgren, Macías‐Moriarity, & Mody, ; Rose et al, ). Mixed results were reported in four cases (Yestrebsky, ; Liebert, Lin, Mazer, Bereknyei, & Lau, ; Heyborne & Perret, ; Betihavas, Bridgman, Kornhaber, & Cross, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flipping learning not just content: A 4‐year action research study investigating the appropriate level of flipped learning

Maycock

Lambert

Bane

2018

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This action research study follows a between-subject design strategy and attempts to identify whether a departure from a direct instructional teaching strategy towards a flipped learning pedagogy results in increases in student performance over time. In particular, the study considers the effects of integrating flipped learning pedagogic instruction into a Year 1, second-semester undergraduate Computer Architecture module. The first year of the study represented a baseline year in which a traditional direct instructional teaching method was used. The three subsequent years of study involved the inclusion of increased proportions of flipped learning instruction. When removing the baseline year from the study and focusing on the years that included a flipped proportion of instruction only, the analysis showed statistically significant increases in learner performance for mature students as the module migrated towards a fully flipped delivery model.Positive increases associated with continuous assessment components of the modules were also observed across the population as the module migrated towards a flipped learning model. However, this apparent increase in learner performance showed no impact on the terminal examination scores across years, indicating that improved performance in continuous assessments was probably due to shallow learning.

show abstract

“…• computer science (Fetaji, Fetaji, Sukic, Gylcan, & Ebibi, 2016;Giannakos, Krogstie, & Aalberg, 2016;Reza & Ijaz Baig, 2015); • English language instruction (Yang, 2017); • engineering (Kecskemety, Corrigan, & Abrams, 2015;Lucke, Dunn, & Christie, 2017;Yelamarthi, K., Drake, E., & Prewett, 2016;Yusong & Daher, 2017); • operations management (Asef-Vaziri, 2015;Pragman, 2014;Prashar, 2015); • pharmacy (Cotta, Shah, Almgren, Macías-Moriarity, & Mody, 2016;Ferreri & O'Connor, 2013;Patanwala, Erstad, & Murphy, 2017); • psychology (Hudson et al, 2015;Talley & Scherer, 2013;Wilson, 2013);…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Student Academic Performance with Traditional, Online, And Flipped Instructional Approaches in a C# Programming Course

Sharp

2017

JITE:IIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/PurposeCompared student academic performance on specific course requirements in a C# programming course across three instructional approaches: traditional, online, and flipped. Background Addressed the following research question: When compared to the online and traditional instructional approaches, does the flipped instructional approach have a greater impact on student academic performance with specific course requirements in a C# programming course? Methodology Quantitative research design conducted over eight 16-week semesters among a total of 271 participants who were undergraduate students enrolled in a C# programming course. Data collected were grades earned from specific course requirements and were analyzed with the nonparametric Kruskal Wallis H-Test using IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 23. ContributionProvides empirical findings related to the impact that different instructional approaches have on student academic performance in a C# programming course. Also describes implications and recommendations for instructors of programming courses regarding instructional approaches that facilitate active learning, student engagement, and self-regulation. FindingsResulted in four statistically significant findings, indicating that the online and flipped instructional approaches had a greater impact on student academic performance than the traditional approach. Recommendations for PractitionersImplement instructional approaches such as online, flipped, or blended which foster active learning, student engagement, and self-regulation to increase student academic performance. Comparison of Instructional Approaches 216 Recommendation for ResearchersBuild upon this study and others similar to it to include factors such as gender, age, ethnicity, and previous academic history. Impact on Society Acknowledge the growing influence of technology on society as a whole.Higher education coursework and programs are evolving to encompass more digitally-based learning contexts, thus compelling faculty to utilize instructional approaches beyond the traditional, lecture-based approach. Future ResearchIncrease the number of participants in the flipped instructional approach to see if it has a greater impact on student academic performance. Include factors beyond student academic performance to include gender, age, ethnicity, and previous academic history.

show abstract

Effectiveness of flipped classroom instructional model in teaching pharmaceutical calculations

Cited by 65 publications

References 8 publications

A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes Comparing Flipped Classroom and Lecture

A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes Comparing Flipped Classroom and Lecture

Flipping learning not just content: A 4‐year action research study investigating the appropriate level of flipped learning

A Comparison of Student Academic Performance with Traditional, Online, And Flipped Instructional Approaches in a C# Programming Course

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About