In this study, flipped instruction in an undergraduate engineering course in the ‘COVID’ online, remote environment was conducted and compared to onsite flipped instruction (i.e. pre-COVID) to explore potential changes in student perceptions. Student perceptions were gathered via survey instruments and investigated further through instructor interviews. This analysis was done at three universities and made possible by extensive research with the flipped classroom at these three schools as part of a previous NSF-funded study between 2014 and 2016. Results gathered in the online remote setting suggest positive changes in student perceptions of flipped instruction compared to the onsite environment, including the decreased perception of the ‘load’ imposed by the flipped classroom and the ‘effort‘’ required. Some desirable outcomes remained unchanged in the remote setting. The recent and emerging literature has suggested the remote, online environment dictated by the pandemic may be beneficial for flipped teaching and learning. These and other findings from conducting flipped classrooms at three engineering schools in the online environment are presented, including perceptions of the classroom environment (via the College and University Environment Inventory), benefits and drawbacks identified, student motivation levels, and perceived learning.
more »
« less
On Moving a Face-to-Face Flipped Classroom to a Remote Setting
Starting in March 2020, the COVID19 pandemic instantly affected the education of 14 million higher education students in the USA. The switch to remote instruction caught instructors and students off guard – teachers had to change their techniques, approaches, and course content rapidly (called “panicgogy”), and students had to adjust to remote instruction in a hurry. Hoping that the pandemic would not last too long, most had expected to return to the regular class format at most by the Fall semester. That expectation was quickly squashed as the summer semester progressed. If one were teaching a face-to-face classroom in a flipped modality, it would be even more challenging to teach a flipped class in an online environment. In this paper, we present how the instructor overhauled a face-to-face flipped class in Numerical Methods to an online environment. This involved 1) rethinking the learning design of the course content via the learning management system, 2) using Microsoft forms as personal response systems, and YouTube for video lectures, 3) not only using break-out rooms for peer-to-peer learning but the “main room” for individual learning as well, 4) exploit the availability of two computers and multiple monitors to deliver and observe the synchronous part of the class, 5) use of discussion boards to streamline the flow of communication that would have otherwise been unwieldy for the instructor, TAs, and students alike, 6) changes made to assessment as it had to be carried online and within a proctoring software environment, 7) changes in the conducting of office hours. The above items will be discussed in the paper, and comparisons of face-to-face and online implementations will be made. The ultimate goal is to present a logic model for a typical lecture-based online flipped STEM classroom for efficient and effective implementation by other instructors.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2013271
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10324423
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Motivation: This is a complete paper. There was a sudden shift from traditional learning to online learning in Spring 2020 with the outbreak of COVID-19. Although online learning is not a new topic of discussion, universities, faculty, and students were not prepared for this sudden change in learning. According to a recent article in ‘The Chronicle of Higher Education, “even under the best of circumstances, virtual learning requires a different, carefully crafted approach to engagement”. The Design Thinking course under study is a required freshmen level course offered in a Mid-western University. The Design Thinking course is offered in a flipped format where all the content to be learned is given to students beforehand and the in-class session is used for active discussions and hands-on learning related to the content provided at the small group level. The final learning objective of the course is a group project where student groups are expected to come up with functional prototypes to solve a real-world problem following the Design Thinking process. There were eighteen sections of the Design Thinking course offered in Spring 2020, and with the outbreak of COVID-19, a few instructors decided to offer synchronous online classes (where instructors were present online during class time and provided orientation and guidance just like a normal class) and a few others decided to offer asynchronous online classes (where orientation from the instructor was delivered asynchronous and the instructor was online during officially scheduled class time but interactions were more like office hours). Students were required to be present synchronously at the team level during the class time in a synchronous online class. In an asynchronous online class, students could be synchronous at the team level to complete their assignment any time prior to the deadline such that they could work during class time but they were not required to work at that time. Through this complete paper, we are trying to understand student learning, social presence and learner satisfaction with respect to different modes of instruction in a freshmen level Design Thinking course. Background: According to literature, synchronous online learning has advantages such as interaction, a classroom environment, and better course quality whereas asynchronous online learning has advantages such as self-controlled and self-directed learning. The disadvantages of synchronous online learning include the learning process, technology issues, and distraction. Social isolation, lack of interaction, and technology issue are a few disadvantages related to asynchronous online learning. Problem Being Addressed: There is a limited literature base investigating different modes of online instruction in a Design Thinking course. Through this paper, we are trying to understand and share the effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous modes of instruction in an online Flipped Design Thinking Course. The results of the paper could also help in this time of pandemic by shedding light on the more effective way to teach highly active group-based classrooms for better student learning, social presence, and learner satisfaction. Method/Assessment: An end of semester survey was monitored in Spring 2020 to understand student experiences in synchronous and asynchronous Design Thinking course sections. The survey was sent to 720 students enrolled in the course in Spring 2020 and 324 students responded to the survey. Learning was measured using the survey instrument developed by Walker (2003) and the social presence and learner satisfaction was measured by the survey modified by Richardson and Swan (2003). Likert scale was used to measure survey responses. Anticipated Results: Data would be analyzed and the paper would be completed by draft paper submission. As the course under study is a flipped and active course with a significant component of group work, the anticipated results after analysis could be that one mode of instruction has higher student learning, social presence, and learner satisfaction compared to the other.more » « less
-
This Research Full Paper presents our findings of studying the effects of teaching modality on collaborative learning by comparing data from two sections of a Database Systems course offered simultaneously, with one offered fully face-to-face in a classroom setting while the other is offered online through a flipped-classroom model. Both sections utilized a collaborative learning approach where students work on group activities for part of the class meeting. Since the two sections were almost identical except for the teaching modality, we are provided with a unique opportunity to study the effect of teaching modalities on collaborative learning. As part of this study, we analyze four crucial data sources: 1) student performance data from the grade book 2) student performance data from the online learning management platform 3) an end-of-semester survey given by the instructor and 4) an end-of-semester survey given by the university. We extract insights on the impact of teaching modalities on collaborative learning in order to identify factors that can enhance collaborative learning. We also study the effect of teaching modalities on students’ performance. We visualize our findings to differentiate between the two modalities, and draw on the strengths of each section to establish recommendations for the instructors for course improvement efforts.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)ABSTRACT Because of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, higher education institutions had to pivot rapidly to online remote learning. Many educators were concerned that the disparate impact of this crisis would exacerbate inequities in learning outcomes and student learning experiences, especially for students from minoritized backgrounds. We examined course grades and student perceptions of their learning experiences in fall (face-to-face) and spring (fully remote) quarters in an introductory biology course series at a public research university. Contrary to our hypothesis, we found that student course grades increased overall during remote learning, and equity gaps in course grades were mitigated for minoritized students. We hypothesize that instructors may have changed their grading practices to compensate for challenges in remote learning in crisis. However, spring students reported significant decreases in the amount of peer negotiation and social support, critical components of active learning. These findings suggest that remote teaching in crisis may have negatively affected student learning environments in ways that may not have been captured by grading practices.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract As use of adaptive learning technology in STEM courses gains traction, studies evaluating its impacts are important to undertake. Adaptive e‐learning platforms provide personalized, flexible learning via monitoring of student progress and performance and subsequent provision of an individualized learning path containing various resources. In this study, adaptive technology was utilized in blended and flipped versions of a numerical methods course. A particular challenge with flipped instruction is preclass preparation, in which videos with the same instruction for all students are often assigned. Therefore, to diversify preclass learning, the instructor developed adaptive lessons via an NSF grant and rigorously assessed outcomes in this flipped class with adaptive learning. In addition, to fully evaluate the lessons and respond to calls from the literature, the lessons were implemented and evaluated in a blended version of the course, which was lecture‐based with available online resources. Data from previous semesters of flipped and blended instruction (without adaptive learning were available), enabling a comparison of four instructional methods. The comparisons consisted of direct assessment (i.e., exam questions) and affective assessment via a survey (i.e., perceptions of the classroom environment). An analysis was performed for students collectively and for underrepresented minority students in engineering. Focus groups enabled a comparison of student perspectives of using adaptive technology in blended versus flipped classrooms as well as by demographic. Upon combining these outcomes, including a notable Cohen's
d = 0.34 for open‐ended‐response performance, the flipped classroom with adaptive learning may be the best method for this STEM course.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
