Flipping for success: evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting

BMC Medical Education

Barbara Schindelka³  Ryan Banow³  Stan Yu¹  Adiba Islam²  John Moraros⁴ 

[1] Research and Program Evaluation Analyst, Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada;School of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada;Instructional Design Specialist, Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching Effectiveness, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada;School of Public Health, University of Saskatchewan, 104 Clinic Place, E-Wing Health Sciences, Room 3320, Saskatoon S7N 2Z4, SK, Canada

关键词: Graduate level setting;    Students;    Instructional technology;    Education;    Flipped Classroom;   

Others  :  1138452
DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0317-2

 received in 2014-11-13, accepted in 2015-02-18,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Flipped Classroom is a model that’s quickly gaining recognition as a novel teaching approach among health science curricula. The purpose of this study was four-fold and aimed to compare Flipped Classroom effectiveness ratings with: 1) student socio-demographic characteristics, 2) student final grades, 3) student overall course satisfaction, and 4) course pre-Flipped Classroom effectiveness ratings.

Methods

The participants in the study consisted of 67 Masters-level graduate students in an introductory epidemiology class. Data was collected from students who completed surveys during three time points (beginning, middle and end) in each term. The Flipped Classroom was employed for the academic year 2012–2013 (two terms) using both pre-class activities and in-class activities.

Results

Among the 67 Masters-level graduate students, 80% found the Flipped Classroom model to be either somewhat effective or very effective (M = 4.1/5.0). International students rated the Flipped Classroom to be significantly more effective when compared to North American students (X² = 11.35, p < 0.05). Students’ perceived effectiveness of the Flipped Classroom had no significant association to their academic performance in the course as measured by their final grades (rs = 0.70). However, students who found the Flipped Classroom to be effective were also more likely to be satisfied with their course experience. Additionally, it was found that the SEEQ variable scores for students enrolled in the Flipped Classroom were significantly higher than the ones for students enrolled prior to the implementation of the Flipped Classroom (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Overall, the format of the Flipped Classroom provided more opportunities for students to engage in critical thinking, independently facilitate their own learning, and more effectively interact with and learn from their peers. Additionally, the instructor was given more flexibility to cover a wider range and depth of material, provide in-class applied learning opportunities based on problem-solving activities and offer timely feedback/guidance to students. Yet in our study, this teaching style had its fair share of challenges, which were largely dependent on the use and management of technology. Despite these challenges, the Flipped Classroom proved to be a novel and effective teaching approach at the graduate level setting.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Moraros et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Baker J. The "classroom flip": Using web course management tools to become the guide on the side. In: 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning. 2000.
• [2]Christensen CM, Eyring HJ: The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education From the Inside Out. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California; 2011.
• [3]Berwick DM, Finkelstein JA: Preparing medical students for the continual improvement of health and health care: Abraham Flexner and the new “public interest”. Acad Med 2010, 85:S56-65.
• [4]Butt A: Students’ views on the use of a flipped classroom approach: Evidence from Australia. Business Educ Accredit 2014 2014, 6(1):33-44.
• [5]Prober CG, Heath C: Lecture halls without lectures—a proposal for medical education. N Engl J Med. 2012, 366:1657-9.
• [6]Echo360. (2012). Blended Learning Technology: Connecting with the Online-All-the-Time Student. http://echo360.com/sites/all/themes/echo360/files/2012_Student_Survey_WP_FINAL.pdf.
• [7]Ruffini MF. (2012). Screencasting to Engage Learning. Educause. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/screencasting-engage-learning.
• [8]Palincsar AS: Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Ann Rev Psychol. 1998, 45:345-75.
• [9]Hill JR, Song L, West RE: Social learning theory and web-based learning environments: a review of research and discussion of implications. Am J Distance Educ. 2009, 23:88-103.
• [10]A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman, New York; 2001.
• [11]Health Professions Education: A Bridge to Quality. National Academies Press, Washington, DC; 2003.
• [12]Chen Y, Wang Y, Chen NS: Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Comput Educ. 2014, 79:16-27.
• [13]Prince M: Does active learning work? A review of the research. J Eng Educ 2004, 93(3):223-31.
• [14]Fulton K: Upside down and inside out: flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learn Lead Technol 2012, 39(8):12-7.
• [15]Strayer JF: How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learn Environ Res 2012, 15(2):171-93.
• [16]Deslauriers L, Wieman C: Learning and retention of quantum concepts with different teaching methods. Phys Rev Spec Topics Phys Educ Res. 2011, 7:1-6.
• [17]Zappe S, Leicht R, Messner J, Litzinger T, Lee WH: AC 2009–92: “Flipping” the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. American Society for Engineering Education, Washington; 2009.
• [18]Marsh HW: SEEQ: A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching. Brit J Educ Psychol 2011, 52(1):77-95.
• [19]Herreid CF, Schiller NA: Case study: case studies and the flipped classroom. J Coll Sci Teach 2013, 42(5):62-6.
• [20]Greenwald AG: Validity concerns and usefulness of student ratings of instruction. Am Psychol 1997, 52(11):1182-6.
• [21]Kulik JA: Student ratings: Validity, utility, and controversy. In The Student Ratings Debate: Are They Valid? How Can We Best Use Them? New Directions for Institutional Research, vol 109. Edited by Theall M, Abrami P, Mets L. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco; 2001:9-25.
• [22]Kohn A: Beware of the standards, not just the tests. Educ Week. 2001, 38:52.