skip to main content

Search for: All records

Award ID contains: 1821664

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. COVID-19 necessitated online teaching (OT) during the second half of the spring 2020 semester. The perceptions of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) faculty of OT at a two-year (2-YI) and a four-year (4-YI) institution were examined during this sudden switchover. One group of educators had received flipped teaching (FT) training (FTEs, n = 23), whereas the other group was practicing traditional teaching (TTEs, n = 18). There were two cohorts of FTEs: cohort 1 were implementing FT for the third time in their classrooms, and cohort 2 had started for the first time. The survey results suggested that FTEs were more confident with OT than TTEs ( P < 0.05). It was interesting to note that 62.5% of the FTEs, whether they were from cohort 1 or cohort 2, chose an asynchronous approach, whereas 37.5% delivered synchronous OT during the sudden transition. It was found that FT experience helped cohort 1 adjust to OT compared with cohort 2. Overall, these results suggest that FTEs were confident and their resources for FT eased the transition to OT. NEW & NOTEWORTHY COVID-19 necessitated online teaching (OT). The perceptions of STEM faculty of OT at two-year and four-year institutions were examined. Onemore »group had received flipped teaching (FT) training (FTEs), whereas the others practiced traditional teaching (TTEs). Among two cohorts of FTEs, cohort 1 had been practicing FT but not cohort 2. FTEs were more confident with OT than TTEs. FT experience helped cohort 1 adjust to OT more than cohort 2. Overall, FT eased the transition to OT.« less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available December 1, 2023
  2. Free, publicly-accessible full text available September 1, 2023
  3. 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