skip to main content
Explore Scholarly Publications and Datasets in the NSF-PAR

  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Accepted Manuscript: Comparison of Student Outcomes and Evaluations in Hybrid Versus Face-to-Face Anatomy and Physiology I Courses
Title: Comparison of Student Outcomes and Evaluations in Hybrid Versus Face-to-Face Anatomy and Physiology I Courses
In this study, two sections of undergraduate Introductory Anatomy and Physiology taught in the traditional face-to-face format (n = 58) was compared to two hybrid classes (n = 38) using the flipped-classroom model taught by the same instructor. Formative and summative examination scores were compared to determine the effect of the different learning methods. Our results revealed no significant difference between the mean scores of summative examinations and between the traditional and hybrid classes (p > 0.05). Of five quizzes administered, students taught in the traditional format scored significantly higher in only one of five quizzes. In addition, comparison of in-class laboratory examination scores showed no difference (P > 0.05) in three out of four. However, student evaluations of the hybrid classes were more positive as determined by end-of-course evaluations (4.54 versus 2.9 on a 1–5 Likert scale). This is the first study that compares a hybrid versus a traditional science course at a historically black college or university. We conclude that comparison of student outcomes in traditional versus hybrid Anatomy and Physiology I classes were similar. At a time when all institutions of higher learning have adopted online learning and distance learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this is a timely comparison
Authors:
Editors:
Dr David Wojnowski
Award ID(s):
1900966
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10326212
Journal Name:
Journal of college science teaching
Volume:
Vol. 51
Issue:
1
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
58-66
ISSN:
0047-231X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ( , Advances in Physiology Education)
    There has been growing evidence that flipped teaching (FT) can increase student engagement. Traditional lecture-based teaching (TT) method was compared with FT and FT combined with retrieval practice (FTR) in a 400-level Exercise Physiology course over eight semesters. In the FT format, lecture content was assigned for students to prepare before class along with an online quiz. During class, the assigned content and quiz questions were reviewed, and a team-based learning (TBL) activity was conducted. Students found FT implementation three times a week (FT3) to be overwhelming, which led to reconfiguration of the FT design to minimize the quiz and TBL sessions to one per week. Subsequently, FT was combined with retrieval exercises (FTR), which involved recalling information, thus promoting retention. The students in the FTR format were given weekly quizzes in class, where no notes were allowed, which affected their quiz grade negatively compared with FT ( P < 0.0001). Again, no resources were permitted during FTR’s TBL sessions. When exam scores were compared with TT, student performance was significantly greater ( P < 0.001) with the FT and FTR methods, suggesting these methods are superior to TT. While both male and female students benefited from FT and FTRmore »methods compared with TT ( P = 0.0008), male students benefited the most (( P = 0.0001). Similarly, when the exam scores were organized into upper and lower halves, both groups benefited from FT and FTR ( P < 0.0001) approaches. In conclusion, both FT and FTR methods benefit students more compared with TT, and male students are impacted the most.« less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ( , 2017 ASEE Pacific Southwest Section Conference)
    Community colleges provide an important pathway for many prospective engineering graduates, especially those from traditionally underrepresented groups. However, due to a lack of facilities, resources, student demand and/or local faculty expertise, the breadth and frequency of engineering course offerings is severely restricted at many community colleges. This in turn presents challenges for students trying to maximize their transfer eligibility and preparedness. Through a grant from the National Science Foundation Improving Undergraduate STEM Education program (NSF IUSE), three community colleges from Northern California collaborated to increase the availability and accessibility of a comprehensive lower-division engineering curriculum, even at small-to-medium sized community colleges. This was accomplished by developing resources and teaching strategies that could be employed in a variety of delivery formats (e.g., fully online, online/hybrid, flipped face-to-face, etc.), providing flexibility for local community colleges to leverage according to their individual needs. This paper focuses on the iterative development, testing, and refining of the resources for an introductory Materials Science course with 3-unit lecture and 1-unit laboratory components. This course is required as part of recently adopted statewide model associate degree curricula for transfer into Civil, Mechanical, Aerospace, and Manufacturing engineering bachelor’s degree programs at California State Universities. However, offering such amore »course is particularly challenging for many community colleges, because of a lack of adequate expertise and/or laboratory facilities and equipment. Consequently, course resources were developed to help mitigate these challenges by streamlining preparation for instructors new to teaching the course, as well as minimizing the face-to-face use of traditional materials testing equipment in the laboratory portion of the course. These same resources can be used to support online hybrid and other alternative (e.g., emporium) delivery approaches. After initial pilot implementation of the course during the Spring 2015 semester by the curriculum designer in a flipped student-centered format, these same resources were then implemented by an instructor who had never previously taught the course, at a different community college that did not have its own materials laboratory facilities. A single site visit was arranged with a nearby community college to afford students an opportunity to complete certain lab activities using traditional materials testing equipment. Lessons learned during this attempt were used to inform curriculum revisions, which were evaluated in a repeat offering the following year. In all implementations of the course, student surveys and interviews were used to determine students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the course resources, student use of these resources, and overall satisfaction with the course. Additionally, student performance on objective assessments was compared with that of traditional lecture delivery of the course by the curriculum designer in prior years. During initial implementations of the course, results from these surveys and assessments revealed low levels of student satisfaction with certain aspects of the flipped approach and course resources, as well as reduced learning among students at the alternate institution. Subsequent modifications to the curriculum and delivery approach were successful in addressing most of these deficiencies.« less
  3. ( , 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition)
    Introduction: Inquiry-based learning is vital to the engineering design process, and most crucially in the laboratory and hands-on settings. Through the model of inquiry-based design, student teams are able to formulate critical inputs to the design process and develop a stronger and more relevant understanding of theoretical principles and their applications. In the junior-level Biotransport laboratory course at Purdue University’s Weldon School of BME, the curriculum utilizes the engineering design process to guide students through three (3) different modules covering different Biotransport phenomena (diffusivity, mass transport, and heat transfer). Students are required to research, conceptualize, and generate hypotheses around a module prompt. Students design, execute, and analyze their own experimental setups to test the hypotheses within an autodidactic peer-learning structure. Methods: A multi-year study was completed spanning from 2014 to 2016, assessing students’ end of course evaluations. With an integration of the flipped lecture into the lab being first implemented in 2015 (prior to 2015, the flipped lecture was a stand-alone course offered outside of the lab sections), the data presented here offers a comparison of student evaluations between these two course structures. Per the student response rates, the sample size for each year was: n=81 (2016); n=60 (2015); n=48more »(2014). The surveys were anonymous and a host of questions related to overall course satisfaction, structure, and content were posed. Results: Analysis of the data showed a consistent increase in overall student satisfaction with the course following the implementation of the new structure. The percent of students giving a satisfactory rating or higher for the 2014, 2015 and 2016 course offerings was 79%, 89%, 92%, respectively. This shows a significant difference between 2014 and 2016. Conclusion: The integration of a flipped lecture into the lab successfully improved student satisfaction and self-perceived understanding of course material. This format also improved the delivery of content to students as assessed by maintaining pertinence to the lab topics and clear understanding of learning concepts.« less
  4. ; ; ; ; ( , 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition)
    A substantial percentage of engineering graduates, especially those from traditionally underrepresented groups, complete their lower-division education at a community college before transferring to a university to earn their degree. However, engineering programs at many community colleges, because of their relatively small scale with often only one permanent faculty member, struggle to offer lower-division engineering courses with the breadth and frequency needed by students for effective and efficient transfer preparation. As a result, engineering education becomes impractical and at times inaccessible for many community college students. Through a grant from the National Science Foundation Improving Undergraduate STEM Education program (NSF IUSE), three community colleges from Northern California collaborated to increase the availability and accessibility of the engineering curriculum by developing resources and teaching strategies to enable small-to-medium sized community college engineering programs to support a comprehensive set of lower-division engineering courses. These resources were developed for use in a variety of delivery formats (e.g., fully online, online/hybrid, flipped face-to-face, etc.), providing flexibility for local community colleges to leverage according to their individual needs. This paper focuses on the development and testing of the resources for an introductory Materials Science course with 3-unit lecture and 1-unit laboratory components. Although most of themore »course resources were developed to allow online delivery if desired, the laboratory curriculum was designed to require some limited face-to-face interaction with traditional materials testing equipment. In addition to the resources themselves, the paper presents the results of the pilot implementation of the course during the Spring 2015 semester, taught using a flipped delivery format consisting of asynchronous remote viewing of lecture videos and face-to-face student-centered problem-solving and lab exercises. These same resources were then implemented in a flipped format by an instructor who had never previously taught the course, at a community college that did not have its own materials laboratory facilities. Site visits were arranged with a nearby community college to afford students an opportunity to complete certain lab activities using traditional materials testing equipment. In both implementations of the course, student surveys and interviews were used to determine students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the course resources, student use of these resources, and overall satisfaction with the course. Additionally, student performance on assessments was compared with that of traditional lecture delivery of the courses in prior years.« less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , Frontiers in Environmental Science)
    Online modes of teaching and learning have gained increased attention following the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in education delivery trends likely to continue for the foreseeable future. It is therefore critical to understand the implications for student learning outcomes and their interest in or affinity towards the subject, particularly in water science classes, where educators have traditionally employed hands-on outdoor activities that are difficult to replicate online. In this study, we share our experiences adapting a field-based laboratory activity on groundwater to accommodate more than 700 students in our largest-enrollment general education course during the pandemic. As part of our adaptation strategy, we offered two versions of the same exercise, one in-person at the Mirror Lake Water Science Learning Laboratory, located on Ohio State University’s main campus, and one online. Although outdoor lab facilities have been used by universities since at least the 1970s, this research is novel in that 1) it considers not only student achievement but also affinity for the subject, 2) it is the first of its kind on The Ohio State University’s main campus, and 3) it was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, at a time when most university classes were unable to take traditional field trips.more »We used laboratory grades and a survey to assess differences in student learning and affinity outcomes for in-person and online exercises. Students who completed the in-person exercise earned better scores than their online peers. For example, in Fall 2021, the median lab score for the in-person group was 97.8%, compared to 91.7% for the online group. The in-person group also reported a significant ( p < 0.05) increase in how much they enjoyed learning about water, while online students reported a significant decrease. Online students also reported a significant decrease in how likely they would be to take another class in water or earth sciences. It is unclear whether the in-person exercise had better learning and affinity outcomes because of the hands-on, outdoor qualities of the lab or because the format allowed greater interaction among peers and teaching instructors (TAs). To mitigate disparities in student learning outcomes between the online and in-person course delivery, instructors will implement future changes to the online version of the lab to enhance interactions among students and TAs.« less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email